Model Comparison
GPT-4o vs LLaMA 4 Scout
GPT-4o: Ultra-efficientLLaMA 4 Scout: Standard
Side-by-side environmental impact comparison. LLaMA 4 Scout uses 40% more energy per query.
LLaMA 4 Scout uses 40% more energy than GPT-4o
0.60 Wh vs 0.43 Wh per query · 0.24 g vs 0.19 g CO₂ · 1 mL vs 2 mL water
GPT-4o
OpenAI
Energy per query0.43 Wh
CO₂ per query0.19 g
Water per query2 mL
VS
LLaMA 4 Scout
Meta
Energy per query0.60 Wh
CO₂ per query0.24 g
Water per query1 mL
GPT-4o
ProviderOpenAI
CategoryText / Chat
Inference LocationAzure US East / Sweden
Confidencepeer-reviewed
Efficiency TierUltra-efficient
LLaMA 4 Scout
ProviderMeta
CategoryText / Chat
Inference LocationSelf-hosted (varies)
Confidenceestimated
Efficiency TierStandard
Frequently Asked Questions
Which uses more energy, GPT-4o or LLaMA 4 Scout?
LLaMA 4 Scout uses 40% more energy per query than GPT-4o. GPT-4o uses 0.43 Wh per query, while LLaMA 4 Scout uses 0.60 Wh.
What is the carbon footprint difference between GPT-4o and LLaMA 4 Scout?
LLaMA 4 Scout uses 26% more CO₂ per query than GPT-4o. GPT-4o emits 0.19 g of CO₂ per query compared to LLaMA 4 Scout's 0.24 g.
Which is more environmentally friendly, GPT-4o or LLaMA 4 Scout?
GPT-4o is the more environmentally friendly option, using 0.43 Wh per query compared to LLaMA 4 Scout's 0.60 Wh. That makes LLaMA 4 Scout roughly 1.4x more energy-intensive.
Calculate your footprint with these models
See how your daily usage of GPT-4o and LLaMA 4 Scout adds up over time. Our calculator estimates energy, carbon, and water impact.
Calculate My Compute