Llama vs ChatGPT

As of 2026-07-18, Llama (Meta: Llama 4 Maverick, 7.2/10) leads ChatGPT (OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Nano, 7.1/10) 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.

Side by side

	Llama	ChatGPT
In today’s benchmark	Meta: Llama 4 Maverick	OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Nano
Score	7.2/10	7.1/10
Language	8.0/10	8.0/10
Speed	176 t/s	157 t/s
Input price/1M	$0.20	$0.20

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.