Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Meta-llama
Meta-llama
vs
Stepfun-ai

Llama 4 Scout vs Step 3.5 Flash

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
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
  • Supports vision

Step 3.5 Flash wins:

  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
Llama 4 Scout
Benchmark Advantage
Step 3.5 Flash
Context Window
Llama 4 Scout
Speed
Llama 4 Scout

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureLlama 4 ScoutStep 3.5 Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyLlama 4 ScoutStep 3.5 Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorMeta-llamaStepfun-ai
ReleasedApr 2025Jan 2026

Llama 4 Scout Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Step 3.5 Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Llama 4 Scout with:

Compare Step 3.5 Flash 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.
Step 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 31.6, compared to Llama 4 Scout's score of 6.7.
Llama 4 Scout has a 327,680 token context window, while Step 3.5 Flash has a 256,000 token context window.
Llama 4 Scout supports vision. Step 3.5 Flash does not support vision.