Meta Llama
Meta's open-weight LLM family. Llama 4 Scout and Maverick pair mixture-of-experts efficiency with native multimodal input and freely downloadable weights.
Updated 2026-08-10
Yes. Meta Llama is free to use.
Listed pricing: Free to download and self-host · Cloud API pricing varies by provider.
Overview
Llama is Meta's family of open-weight language models — you download the weights, run them on hardware you control, and pay nothing per query. The current generation is Llama 4, built on a mixture-of-experts architecture: Scout activates roughly 17B parameters per token out of about 109B total, Maverick activates a similar 17B out of roughly 400B. Both handle text and images natively rather than through a bolted-on vision adapter. A third and much larger model, Behemoth, was previewed at launch but has not shipped as a weights release.
The competitive picture has changed sharply since the entry was first written. Llama 4's April 2025 launch drew criticism on two fronts: the version that posted a headline LMArena score was an experimental chat variant rather than the released weights, and independent long-context evaluations found retrieval quality degrading far below the advertised 10M-token ceiling. In the same window, open-weight releases from Chinese labs — DeepSeek, Qwen, and others — matched or passed Llama on most public reasoning and coding benchmarks. Llama is no longer the default answer to "what's the best open model," and pretending otherwise would be dishonest.
What it still owns is distribution. No other open model runs in as many places: llama.cpp and Ollama for local inference, vLLM and TensorRT-LLM for serving, thousands of fine-tunes on Hugging Face, and managed endpoints on AWS Bedrock, Azure AI Foundry, Google Cloud, Together, Groq, and Fireworks simultaneously. Meta also operates its own Llama API and a consumer Meta AI assistant across WhatsApp, Instagram, and Messenger. One caveat worth knowing before you build: the Llama license is not OSI open source. It caps use by companies above 700M monthly active users, and the Llama 4 multimodal weights are explicitly not licensed to entities domiciled in the EU — a restriction that has surprised more than one European team mid-project.
Is Meta Llama free?
Yes. Meta Llama is free to use.
What the free tier covers: The weights themselves are free to download and self-host. The Meta AI consumer assistant is free to use.
Listed pricing: Free to download and self-host · Cloud API pricing varies by provider.
Pricing verified . That is the date the plans were last re-checked against the vendor's own pages, not today's date. Confirm on the official site before you pay.
What the free tier leaves out
Read straight off the plan list below. Vendors move features between tiers, so check the current split before you pay.
- Cloud and first-party APIs Varies by provider Managed endpoints on AWS Bedrock, Azure AI Foundry, Google Cloud, Together, Groq, and Fireworks, plus Meta's own Llama API. Per-token rates differ substantially between providers and model sizes — check the provider's current price page.
Meta Llama pricing
| Plan | Price | What's included |
|---|---|---|
| Self-hosted | Free | Download the weights under the Llama Community License and run them on your own hardware or cloud instances. You pay for compute only. |
| Meta AI assistant | Free | Consumer chat assistant across WhatsApp, Instagram, Messenger, and the standalone app. No API access, no model selection. |
| Cloud and first-party APIs | Varies by provider | Managed endpoints on AWS Bedrock, Azure AI Foundry, Google Cloud, Together, Groq, and Fireworks, plus Meta's own Llama API. Per-token rates differ substantially between providers and model sizes — check the provider's current price page. |
Download the weights under the Llama Community License and run them on your own hardware or cloud instances. You pay for compute only.
Consumer chat assistant across WhatsApp, Instagram, Messenger, and the standalone app. No API access, no model selection.
Managed endpoints on AWS Bedrock, Azure AI Foundry, Google Cloud, Together, Groq, and Fireworks, plus Meta's own Llama API. Per-token rates differ substantially between providers and model sizes — check the provider's current price page.
One plan carries no published number: Cloud and first-party APIs, recorded as “Varies by provider”. Nothing is estimated in its place. The vendor's own pricing page is the only source for those figures.
Pricing verified . That is the date the plans were last re-checked against the vendor's own pages, not today's date. Confirm on the official site before you pay.
Is Meta Llama worth it?
Worth it for ML and platform engineers who need weights they can host themselves — for data residency, air-gapped deployment, or per-query cost control — rather than teams chasing the highest benchmark score available.
You can test that on the free tier before paying anything. The recorded trade-offs are listed below, and any one of them can settle the question on its own.
The 7.5/10 AI Score is an editorial read of published capability, price and shipping pace. Nobody here has hands-on hours with Meta Llama. How we verify.
Worth it if
The strengths recorded against this entry.
- Weights are yours to download — no per-query cost, and prompts never leave your infrastructure
- Mixture-of-experts design keeps inference cost near that of a small dense model
- Runs almost everywhere: llama.cpp, Ollama, vLLM, plus managed endpoints on every major cloud at once
- Thousands of community fine-tunes on Hugging Face for domain-specific work
- Free consumer access through Meta AI in WhatsApp, Instagram, and Messenger
Not worth it if
Any one of these blocks your use case.
- No longer the strongest open-weight family — DeepSeek and Qwen releases match or beat Llama 4 on most public benchmarks
- The 10M-token context is a nominal ceiling; independent long-context evals show quality dropping well before it
- Not OSI open source: 700M monthly-active-user cap, and the multimodal weights are not licensed to EU-domiciled entities
- Meta previewed a larger Behemoth model that never shipped as weights, leaving the frontier open-release commitment unclear
What sets Meta Llama apart
- Weights are downloadable and self-hostable at zero per-token cost, which GPT, Claude, and Gemini do not offer at all
- Mixture-of-experts with ~17B active parameters means quantized Scout runs on a single high-end GPU
- Available as a managed API on AWS Bedrock, Azure, Google Cloud, Together, Groq, and Fireworks simultaneously — the widest provider coverage of any open model
- Against other open-weight families it has no quality advantage left; DeepSeek and Qwen compete directly and often win. Llama's edge is ecosystem breadth and tooling support, not the model itself
Key features
Mixture-of-experts
Llama 4 activates roughly 17B parameters per token while drawing on a much larger expert pool, so inference cost tracks a small model even though total capacity does not. Quantized Scout fits on a single high-end GPU; Maverick needs a multi-GPU host.
Native multimodal input
Text and images go into the same model with no separate vision encoder to wire up — document analysis, chart reading, and visual Q&A work out of the box. Note the license excludes EU-domiciled entities from the multimodal weights.
Long context window
Scout is specified up to 10M tokens and Maverick up to 1M. Treat the ceiling as nominal rather than usable end to end: independent long-context evaluations show retrieval accuracy falling off well before the advertised limit.
Self-hosting and fine-tuning
Full weights download under the Llama Community License. Fine-tune with LoRA, QLoRA, or full-parameter training on private data, serve through vLLM or llama.cpp, and keep every token inside your own network — the core reason to pick Llama over a closed API.
How it compares
| Tool | Best for | Pricing | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meta Llama | ML and platform engineers who need weights they can host themselves — for data residency, air-gapped deployment, or per-query cost control — rather than teams chasing the highest benchmark score available. | Free to download and self-host · Cloud API pricing varies by provider | 7.5/10 |
| Claude vs Claude → | Developers and technical teams who want a coding agent running in their own repo, terminal and IDE rather than a hosted editor, plus a chat assistant strong enough for long-form writing and 1M-token codebase analysis. | Free + Pro $17-20/mo + Max from $100/mo + Team $20-25/seat | 9.4/10 |
| ChatGPT vs ChatGPT → | Generalists and small teams who want one $20 subscription covering reasoning, full-duplex voice, image and video generation, Deep Research and a phone-controllable coding agent instead of stitching four separate tools together. | Free + Go (low-cost, regional) + Plus $20/mo + Pro $200/mo; Business and Enterprise above | 9.3/10 |
| GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-5.6 Sol → | Engineering teams building long-horizon coding or tool-use agents who need a frontier reasoning tier for the hard steps and can route easier calls to Terra or Luna on the same API key. | API usage-based: Sol $5/$30 per 1M tokens; cheaper Terra and Luna tiers cut July 30 | 9.3/10 |
Compare head-to-head
Related reading
Gov and Big Labs Get Frontier AI First. We Don't.
The most capable AI now reaches a few labs and the government first, then trickles to the public in guardrailed form. Why that precedent matters.
Muse Glimmer and the 30B Open-Weights Ceiling
Meta released Muse Glimmer's 30B weights under Apache 2.0, landing in the same consumer-GPU size class as every other recent open model release.
OpenAI Astra's Cyber Pause and the Release Rules
OpenAI flagged Astra as critical on cybersecurity and paused non-essential work on it. What the hold covers and what nobody outside OpenAI can check.
Ready to try Meta Llama?
Head to the official site to start with Meta Llama — pricing and plans are listed above.
Visit Meta Llama

