+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude Opus 4 vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Claude Opus 4 leads with 32.9% higher average benchmark score. Claude Opus 4 offers 72.0K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is $89.25 cheaper per million tokens. Overall, Claude Opus 4 is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4 was developed as the flagship model in the Claude 4 generation, designed to push the boundaries of AI capability in complex reasoning, analysis, and multi-step problem-solving. Built to handle the most demanding enterprise tasks, it represents Anthropic's highest tier of intelligence and capability.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B was developed as a flagship-tier open-source model, designed to provide advanced capabilities with 90 billion parameters. Built to serve applications requiring high-quality reasoning and generation, it represents a powerful option within the Llama 3.2 series for demanding tasks.
7 months newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
Claude Opus 4
Anthropic
2025-05-22
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Claude Opus 4
Input:$15.00
Output:$75.00
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input:$0.35
Output:$0.40($89.25 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude Opus 4
Average Score:79.6%(+32.9%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Average Score:46.7%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude Opus 4
4 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 120 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
ZeroEval
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
Claude Opus 4
Avg Score:79.6%(+32.9%)
Providers:4
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Avg Score:46.7%
Providers:5