Llama vs ChatGPT

As of 2026-10-13, Llama (Meta: Llama 4 Maverick, 7.5/10) leads ChatGPT (OpenAI: GPT-6 Astra, 7.4/10) in our daily benchmark, where over 350 AI models are evaluated.

Llama from Meta is the most widely used open model, and it can run on your own servers. That is the main argument — not that it beats ChatGPT on quality.

Meta
Llama
Meta: Llama 4 Maverick
Score: 7.5/10
Language: 8.7/10
Speed: 111 t/s
$0.19
OpenAI
ChatGPT
OpenAI: GPT-6 Astra
Score: 7.4/10
Language: 8.3/10
Speed: 160 t/s
$10.00

Side by side

LlamaChatGPT
In today’s benchmarkMeta: Llama 4 MaverickOpenAI: GPT-6 Astra
Score7.5/107.4/10
Language8.7/108.3/10
Speed111 t/s160 t/s
Input price/1M$0.19$10.00

What separates them?

ChatGPT is a service you buy access to. Llama is model weights you can download, run yourself and fine-tune. Run Llama on your own infrastructure and the data never leaves the building — solving the privacy problem in a way no cloud service can. The price is that you have to operate it, and that quality on Scandinavian languages is consistently weaker.

Who should choose what?

If you have strict requirements that data must not leave the organisation, and the skills to operate models yourself, Llama is the only real option of the two. For everything else ChatGPT delivers better results with far less work.

hvilkenAI is independent. We have no affiliate agreements, sponsored placements or commercial ties to the AI providers we test. The numbers above come from today’s benchmark.

Frequently asked questions

Can I run Llama myself?
Yes. That is the entire point of open weights. The smaller variants run on a powerful PC; the large ones need server hardware.
Is Llama free?
The weights are free to download, but you pay for the hardware that runs them. Through API providers you pay per token, often cheaper than ChatGPT.
How good is Llama on Scandinavian languages?
See the language score in the table above. It updates daily and shows the gap in black and white.

Read also

← Back to home

How to get more value from this comparison

Use this comparison as a practical decision aid, not as an advertising list. HvilkenAI is built to make AI selection easier when the market changes quickly and model names alone say little about real quality.

Start with the task you actually need to solve. A model that is good at short chat is not automatically best for long documents, code, customer-facing text, research or work involving sensitive information. Consider language quality, price, speed, stability and how much editing the answer requires before choosing a subscription or API.

We evaluate over 350 AI models and present the most useful signals in a format that works for everyday users, students, businesses and developers. The exact calculation is proprietary, but the assessment is based on standardised tasks, updated benchmark data and editorial review of whether the recommendations make sense in practical use.

For important decisions, run a small test of your own: use the same prompt, language and expected format in two or three relevant models. Look at precision, source handling, tone, speed and how easy the answer is to verify. That makes the benchmark a time-saving starting point, not a final answer you must follow blindly.

Use the links on the page as well. One page rarely gives the whole picture: the benchmark shows today’s numbers, the AI test translates your need into concrete recommendations, and the privacy/terms pages explain which data and limitations you should consider. Used together, these sources make the choice more robust than following a model name from social media.

If the result will be used at work, document why the tool was chosen: which task it solves, which alternatives were considered, which data should not be shared and how the answer will be quality-checked. That makes it easier to switch model later if price, quality or provider terms change.

When a page is included in the sitemap, it should also stand on its own as a useful explanation. That is why we emphasise practical choices, concrete control questions and clear limits for how data can be used.

The goal is that the reader can move on with a safer choice after a few minutes, without already knowing every model or provider.

Pay particular attention to whether the recommendation fits the language, price and risk in your own situation.

In short: choose what you can verify.

When free is enough

Choose free or low-cost first when the task is simple, risk is low and you can verify the answer yourself.

When paid is worth it

Paid models can be worth the cost when documents are long, precision matters or you save real working time.

When to wait

If the need is unclear, start with the test and benchmark before committing to a provider.