Side-by-side technical and economic comparison between Google's Gemini 3.8 Pro and Meta / Together's Llama 4 Vivas.
| Metric | Gemini 3.8 Pro | Llama 4 Vivas | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Provider Organization | Meta / Together | — | |
| Standard Input / 1M | $4.00 | $0.25 | Llama 4 Vivas (94% lower) |
| Cached Input / 1M | $0.40 | $0.06 | Llama 4 Vivas lower |
| Output / 1M | $18.00 | $0.85 | Llama 4 Vivas lower |
| Context Window | 1.05M | 1M | Gemini 3.8 Pro (1.05M) |
| Max Generation Tokens | 64k | 128k | Llama 4 Vivas |
| Tokenizer Family | Google Gemini SentencePiece (256k vocabulary) | Meta Llama 3 Tokenizer (128k vocabulary) | — |
Opt for Gemini 3.8 Pro when your engineering requirements prioritize Google's ecosystem, specific tokenizer efficiencies (Calibrated Gemini Tokenizer (±4%)), or when your expected prompt-to-completion ratios favor its $4/M input rate.
Opt for Llama 4 Vivas when looking for Meta / Together's tooling integration, specific context window depth (1M tokens), or when output generation volume favors its $0.85/M rate.