Model Comparison
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Llama 4 Scout
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · LG AI Research, Meta
Recommended Pick
LG EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) 15 metric wins Strongest on: Input price, Output price, TTFT
Lowest Price
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning)
42.7 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning)
9.4 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Llama 4 Scout.
Reasoning gap
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) leads Llama 4 Scout by 11.7 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) leads Llama 4 Scout by 2.7 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) wins 15 measurable categories, including Input price, Output price, TTFT, Latency.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning)
LG AI Research
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Llama 4 Scout
Meta
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick LG EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) | Me Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.17/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.66/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.29/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | LG AI Research | Meta |
| Release Date | Jul 15, 2025 | Apr 5, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 97.9 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 630ms |
| Latency | — | 630ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 42.7 | 31.0 |
| Intelligence | 11.7 | 13.5 |
| Coding | 9.4 | 6.7 |
| Math | 39.3 | 14.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 62.8% | 58.7% |
| MMLU Pro | 76.8% | 75.2% |
| HLE | 4.9% | 4.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | 47.2% | 29.9% |
| MATH 500 | 93.9% | 84.4% |
| AIME 2025 | 39.3% | 14.0% |
| AIME (Original) | 47.0% | 28.3% |
| SciCode | 25.2% | 17.0% |
| LCR | 8.0% | 25.8% |
| IFBench | 33.5% | 39.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 4.1% | 15.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 1.5% | 1.5% |
Key Takeaways
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 42.7 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 9.4 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
EXAONE 4.0 32B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Llama 4 Scout
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
