Llama 4 Scout vs MiniMax M2
Side-by-side comparison of pricing and capabilities
Input Price Comparison
| Attribute | Llama 4 Scout | MiniMax M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | MiniMax |
| Input Price | $0.17 /1M tokens | $0.3 /1M tokens |
| Output Price | $0.6 /1M tokens | $1.2 /1M tokens |
| Cached Input | $0.017 /1M tokens | $0.030 /1M tokens |
| Context Window | 10.0M | 256K |
| Type | chat | chat |
| Status | current | current |
Capability Comparison
| Capability | Llama 4 Scout | MiniMax M2 |
|---|---|---|
| coding | ||
| vision | ||
| multilingual |
Which should you choose?
Budget-conscious: Llama 4 Scout is 43% cheaper on input tokens ($0.17 vs $0.3 per 1M tokens).
Context-heavy tasks: Llama 4 Scout offers a larger context window (10.0M vs 256K), making it better for long documents or conversations.
Capability fit: Llama 4 Scout supports 2 capabilities (coding, vision), while MiniMax M2 supports 2 (coding, multilingual).
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper: Llama 4 Scout or MiniMax M2?
Llama 4 Scout costs $0.17/1M input vs MiniMax M2 at $0.3/1M input. Llama 4 Scout is 43% cheaper on input tokens.
How do output prices compare between Llama 4 Scout and MiniMax M2?
Llama 4 Scout output: $0.6/1M, MiniMax M2 output: $1.2/1M. Llama 4 Scout is more economical for generation-heavy workloads.
What is Llama 4 Scout best used for?
Llama 4 Scout is best for budget-conscious applications, high-volume chatbots, and tasks where cost efficiency is the primary concern.
What is MiniMax M2 best used for?
MiniMax M2 is suited for complex reasoning, analysis, and tasks that benefit from its coding and multilingual capabilities.