Llama 4 (Meta) vs Codex (OpenAI)
Which one should you pick? Here's the full breakdown.
Llama 4 (Meta)
Meta's open-weights flagship family -- Scout (10M context), Maverick (multimodal 400B MoE), Behemoth in preview
Codex (OpenAI)
OpenAI's cloud-based coding agent -- runs parallel tasks, proposes PRs, and lives inside ChatGPT
Powered by GPT-5.3-Codex / GPT-5.4
| Category | Llama 4 (Meta) | Codex (OpenAI) |
|---|---|---|
| Ease of Use | 5.0 | 8.0 |
| Output Quality | 8.5 | 8.0 |
| Value | 9.0 | 8.0 |
| Features | 9.0 | 9.0 |
| Overall | 7.9 | 8.3 |
Pricing Comparison
| Feature | Llama 4 (Meta) | Codex (OpenAI) |
|---|---|---|
| Free Tier | Yes | Yes |
| Starting Price | $0 | $0 |
Benchmark Head-to-Head
Llama 4 Maverick (17B/400B MoE) vs GPT-5.3-Codex
| Benchmark | Llama 4 (Meta) | Codex (OpenAI) |
|---|---|---|
| HumanEval | 88% | 95% |
Which Should You Pick?
Pick Llama 4 (Meta) if...
- ✓Better value for money (9/10)
Developers and teams who need a permissively-licensed open-weights model with strong tooling, long context (Scout), or multimodal (Maverick). Safe default choice given the ecosystem.
Visit Llama 4 (Meta)Pick Codex (OpenAI) if...
- ✓Easier to use (8 vs 5)
- ✓Stronger on python code generation (+7.0% on HumanEval)
Developers already paying for ChatGPT Plus who want a coding agent at no extra cost. Especially good for parallel task execution -- assign multiple bug fixes or feature branches and let Codex work them simultaneously.
Visit Codex (OpenAI)Our Verdict
Codex (OpenAI) edges out Llama 4 (Meta) with a 8.3 vs 7.9 overall score. Both are solid picks, but Codex (OpenAI) has the advantage in features.