Verified November 2026

Home › Compare › Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Llama 4 Scout

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Llama 4 Scout

A straight cost comparison of Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (Google Gemini) and Llama 4 Scout (Meta (Llama)), per 1,000,000 tokens, verified November 2026.

$0.30Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite input / 1M
$0.18Llama 4 Scout input / 1M
65%Blended price gap
Llama 4 ScoutCheaper blended

Rate-by-rate comparison

USD per 1M tokens · November 2026
MetricGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteLlama 4 ScoutWinner
Input / 1M$0.30$0.18Llama 4 Scout
Cached input / 1M$0.03$0.018Llama 4 Scout
Cache write / 1M——Tie
Output / 1M$2.50$0.59Llama 4 Scout
Context window1,000,00010,000,000Llama 4 Scout
Batch APIYesYesTie
Long-context tierNoneNone—

For per-token metrics, the lower number wins. For context window and batch support, the higher or broader option wins. A dash means the provider does not publish that rate: a missing cache-write fee means writes are not billed per token, while a missing cached-input rate means cache hits bill at the full input rate.

Blended cost: 1M input + 250K output

ModelBlended costDifference
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.925+$0.598
Llama 4 Scout$0.328Cheaper

Ten workloads, two bills

The same two models, priced across ten workloads that differ only in their input:output ratio. Nothing else changes — no retries, no system prompt, no middleware.

WorkloadGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteLlama 4 ScoutWinner
Classification
100K reqs · 500 in / 10 out
$17.50$9.59Llama 4 Scout
Data extraction
10K reqs · 2K in / 200 out
$11$4.78Llama 4 Scout
Support chat
1K reqs · 4K in / 600 out
$2.70$1.07Llama 4 Scout
Code review
2K reqs · 8K in / 1.5K out
$12.30$4.65Llama 4 Scout
Summarisation
1K reqs · 20K in / 1K out
$8.50$4.19Llama 4 Scout
Agent loop
5K reqs · 12K in / 2K out
$43$16.70Llama 4 Scout
Translation
500 reqs · 15K in / 15K out
$21$5.77Llama 4 Scout
Long-document QA
200 reqs · 120K in / 800 out
$7.60$4.41Llama 4 Scout
Cached RAG
1K reqs · 50K in (45K cached) / 1K out
$5.36$2.31Llama 4 Scout
Nightly batch
10K reqs · 10K in / 2K out
$40$14.90Llama 4 Scout

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins 0 of 10, Llama 4 Scout wins 10 of 10. The winner is set by the token mix, not by the headline rate.

Where the two bills cross over

Llama 4 Scout is cheaper on both sides of the mix: $0.18 vs $0.30 per million input tokens, and $0.59 vs $2.50 per million output. No input:output ratio reverses that, so on price alone the other model never becomes the better choice — it has to win on context, latency or output quality.

Cost at four scales

The same support-chat workload (4K input, 600 output per request) at four monthly volumes.

Requests / monthGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteLlama 4 ScoutDifference
100$0.27$0.107Llama 4 Scout cheaper by $0.163
1,000$2.70$1.07Llama 4 Scout cheaper by $1.63
10,000$27$10.74Llama 4 Scout cheaper by $16.26
100,000$270$107Llama 4 Scout cheaper by $163

What caching does to each bill

Caching only helps the part of the prompt that repeats. This is the support-chat workload (1,000 requests, 4,000 input tokens each) with an increasing share of that prompt served from a warm cache, written once on the first request.

Cached share of the promptGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteLlama 4 ScoutWinner
0%$2.70$1.07Llama 4 Scout
50%$2.16$0.75Llama 4 Scout
80%$1.84$0.556Llama 4 Scout
95%$1.68$0.459Llama 4 Scout

Both models publish a cached-read rate, so the discount is comparable: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite reads cache at $0.03 per million, Llama 4 Scout at $0.018.

Which one should you pick?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins on none of the ten workloads above, while Llama 4 Scout wins on classification, data extraction, support chat, code review, summarisation, agent loop, translation, long-document qa, cached rag, nightly batch.

Beyond price, the two differ on input rate ($0.30 vs $0.18); output rate ($2.50 vs $0.59); cached-input rate ($0.03 vs $0.018); context window (1,000,000 vs 10,000,000).

Batch mode is available on Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Llama 4 Scout, which halves the nightly job. Both publish cached-input discounts, so a stable system prompt is worth caching on either.

FAQ

Is Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite cheaper than Llama 4 Scout?

On a blended 1M-input-plus-250K-output workload, Llama 4 Scout is cheaper by 65% ($0.328 vs $0.925). The gap changes for cache-heavy prompts and for batch jobs, as the workload table shows.

Which handles longer prompts, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout has the larger context window (10,000,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens). Neither model publishes a long-context surcharge.

Do both models support prompt caching?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite bills cached reads at $0.03 per 1M; Llama 4 Scout at $0.018.

Related comparisons

Run your own token volumes