codestral-latest
Chat comparison
codestral-latestvsllama-4-maverick
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
llama-4-maverick
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Context window
codestral-latest
32,000 tokens
llama-4-maverickBetter fit
1,048,576 tokens
Input formats
codestral-latest
text
llama-4-maverick
text, image
Vision
codestral-latest
Not supported
llama-4-maverickBetter fit
Supported
JSON mode
codestral-latestBetter fit
Supported
llama-4-maverick
Not supported
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
codestral-latest
98.49%
llama-4-maverick
95.3%
Average response time
codestral-latest
3,128.54 ms
llama-4-maverick
4,183.35 ms
P95 API latency
codestral-latest
10,000 ms
llama-4-maverick
10,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Quick take
- llama-4-maverick has a larger context window.
- llama-4-maverick supports image input while the other model does not.
- codestral-latest recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.