GPT-5 Mini vs Llama 4 Maverick

Across our 12-test suite GPT-5 Mini outscored Llama 4 Maverick on 11 benchmarks and tied on persona consistency. Key comparisons: - Structured output: GPT-5 Mini 5 vs Maverick 4 — GPT-5 Mini is tied for 1st (tied with 24 others, rank 1 of 54) while Maverick ranks 26 of 54; this matters for JSON/schema tasks and strict format adherence. - Strategic analysis: GPT-5 Mini 5 vs Maverick 2 — GPT-5 Mini is tied for 1st (rank 1 of 54), Maverick ranks 44 of 54; expect stronger nuanced tradeoff reasoning from GPT-5 Mini. - Constrained rewriting: GPT-5 Mini 4 vs Maverick 3 — GPT-5 Mini ranks 6 of 53; better for tight-length rewriting. - Creative problem solving: GPT-5 Mini 4 vs Maverick 3 — GPT-5 Mini ranks 9 of 54; it produces more specific feasible ideas in our tests. - Tool calling: GPT-5 Mini 3 (rank 47 of 54) vs Maverick: tested but hit a tool calling rate limit on OpenRouter; GPT-5 Mini still wins here by our measured score, though Maverick’s transient rate-limit quirk may have affected results. - Faithfulness: GPT-5 Mini 5 vs Maverick 4 — GPT-5 Mini tied for 1st (rank 1 of 55), better at sticking to source material. - Classification, long context, safety calibration, agentic planning, multilingual: GPT-5 Mini leads on these tests (see scores: classification 4 vs 3; long context 5 vs 4; safety calibration 3 vs 2; agentic planning 4 vs 3; multilingual 5 vs 4). - Persona consistency: tie (both score 5). External math/coding checks (Epoch AI): GPT-5 Mini scores 64.7% on SWE-bench Verified (Epoch AI) and ranks 8 of 12; on MATH Level 5 it scores 97.8% (rank 2 of 14), and on AIME 2025 it scores 86.7% (rank 9 of 23). Llama 4 Maverick has no external Epoch AI scores in the payload. In short, GPT-5 Mini demonstrates higher task accuracy, stronger long-context and math performance, and top-tier structured-output results in our benchmarks; Llama 4 Maverick’s strengths are primarily cost and a larger context window (see below) but it did not win any internal tests here.

Per the payload: GPT-5 Mini costs $0.25 per 1k input tokens and $2.00 per 1k output tokens; Llama 4 Maverick costs $0.15 per 1k input and $0.60 per 1k output. Per 1M tokens (1,000 × 1k): GPT-5 Mini = $250 input / $2,000 output. Llama 4 Maverick = $150 input / $600 output. For a 50/50 input/output split per 1M tokens: GPT-5 Mini = $1,125; Llama 4 Maverick = $375. At 10M tokens: GPT-5 Mini ≈ $11,250 vs Llama 4 Maverick ≈ $3,750 (50/50 split). At 100M tokens: GPT-5 Mini ≈ $112,500 vs Llama 4 Maverick ≈ $37,500. The ~3.33× priceRatio in the payload means teams at high throughput (10M+ tokens/month) will see large absolute savings with Llama 4 Maverick; small-scale projects or apps where quality on structured output, long context, or math matters more may prefer GPT-5 Mini despite the higher cost.

Choose GPT-5 Mini if you need the highest accuracy on structured outputs, long-context retrieval, math/analysis, and faithful responses — our tests show GPT-5 Mini wins 11/12 benchmarks and posts 97.8% on MATH Level 5 (Epoch AI). Choose Llama 4 Maverick if your primary constraint is cost or you need an extremely large context window: Maverick’s pricing ($0.15 input / $0.60 output per 1k) and 1,048,576-token window lower operational spend. Practical picks: - Use GPT-5 Mini for production systems that must meet strict JSON/schema compliance, complex reasoning, or math-heavy applications. - Use Llama 4 Maverick for high-volume, cost-sensitive deployments where modest accuracy tradeoffs are acceptable or when the 1,048,576 context window is required and cost dominates.