Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Meta-llama
Meta-llama
vs
Minimax
Minimax

Llama 4 Scout vs MiniMax M2.7

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

Key Takeaways

Llama 4 Scout wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
  • Supports vision

MiniMax M2.7 wins:

  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
Price Advantage
Llama 4 Scout
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Context Window
Llama 4 Scout
Speed
Llama 4 Scout

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureLlama 4 ScoutMiniMax M2.7
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyLlama 4 ScoutMiniMax M2.7
LicenseOpen SourceProprietary
AuthorMeta-llamaMinimax
ReleasedApr 2025Mar 2026

Llama 4 Scout Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

MiniMax M2.7 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Llama 4 Scout with:

Compare MiniMax M2.7 with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Llama 4 Scout has cheaper input pricing at $0.08/M tokens. Llama 4 Scout has cheaper output pricing at $0.30/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 41.9, compared to Llama 4 Scout's score of 6.7.
Llama 4 Scout has a 327,680 token context window, while MiniMax M2.7 has a 204,800 token context window.
Llama 4 Scout supports vision. MiniMax M2.7 does not support vision.