File size: 9,449 Bytes
906ae5e | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 | # LLM Model Comparison 2026
**Which LLM should you use for enterprise AI in 2026?** This open dataset compares 16 large language models from 7 providers across 22 fields: pricing, benchmark scores, context windows, latency, API features, and recommended use cases.
Published and maintained by [Salt Technologies AI](https://www.salttechno.ai), the AI engineering division of [Salt Technologies](https://www.salttechno.com) (14+ years, 800+ projects delivered).
[](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
[](https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026/)
[](https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026/)
[](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18697956)
## Quick Links
- **Interactive dataset page:** [salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026](https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026/)
- **Download JSON:** [llm-model-comparison-2026.json](https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026.json)
- **Download CSV:** [llm-model-comparison-2026.csv](https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026.csv)
## What's Inside
### Pricing Comparison (per 1M tokens)
| Model | Provider | Input | Output | Context | Open Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-4.1 | OpenAI | $2.00 | $8.00 | 1M | No |
| GPT-4.1 mini | OpenAI | $0.40 | $1.60 | 1M | No |
| o4-mini | OpenAI | $1.10 | $4.40 | 200K | No |
| o3 | OpenAI | $2.00 | $8.00 | 200K | No |
| Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Anthropic | $3.00 | $15.00 | 200K | No |
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | Anthropic | $1.00 | $5.00 | 200K | No |
| Claude Opus 4.5 | Anthropic | $5.00 | $25.00 | 200K | No |
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Google | $1.25 | $10.00 | 1M | No |
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | Google | $0.30 | $2.50 | 1M | No |
| Llama 4 Scout | Meta | $0.11 | $0.34 | 10M | Yes |
| Llama 4 Maverick | Meta | $0.20 | $0.60 | 10M | Yes |
| DeepSeek V3 | DeepSeek | $0.25 | $1.10 | 128K | Yes |
| DeepSeek R1 | DeepSeek | $0.55 | $2.19 | 128K | Yes |
| Mistral Large 3 | Mistral AI | $0.50 | $1.50 | 256K | Yes |
| Mistral Small 3.2 | Mistral AI | $0.06 | $0.18 | 128K | Yes |
| Command A | Cohere | $2.50 | $10.00 | 256K | No |
### Benchmark Scores
| Model | MMLU | HumanEval | MATH | MT-Bench |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek R1 | **90.8** | 85.3 | **97.3** | - |
| Claude Opus 4.5 | 89.5 | 91.0 | 76.0 | **9.3** |
| Claude Sonnet 4.5 | 89.0 | 93.0 | 78.5 | 9.2 |
| DeepSeek V3 | 88.5 | 82.6 | 90.2 | 8.8 |
| o3 | 87.5 | **95.2** | 96.7 | - |
| o4-mini | 83.2 | 93.4 | 96.7 | - |
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | 87.2 | 84.0 | 78.0 | 9.0 |
| GPT-4.1 | 86.5 | 90.2 | 80.4 | 9.2 |
## Data Files
```
data/
llm-model-comparison-2026.csv # 16 records, 22 fields
llm-model-comparison-2026.json # Same data with schema + metadata
```
### Schema (22 fields)
| Field | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| `model` | string | Model name |
| `provider` | string | Company that created/offers the model |
| `parametersBillions` | string | Parameter count in billions, or "Undisclosed" |
| `contextWindow` | string | Maximum context window (tokens) |
| `trainingCutoff` | string | Training data cutoff date |
| `inputCostPer1M` | number (USD) | Cost per 1M input tokens |
| `outputCostPer1M` | number (USD) | Cost per 1M output tokens |
| `pricingNote` | string | Additional pricing context |
| `openSource` | boolean | Model weights publicly available |
| `multimodal` | boolean | Supports image/video/audio input |
| `functionCalling` | boolean | Supports structured tool calling |
| `jsonMode` | boolean | Guaranteed JSON output |
| `streaming` | boolean | Streaming token output |
| `fineTuning` | boolean | Fine-tuning support |
| `enterpriseReady` | boolean | Enterprise SLAs, SOC2, support |
| `mmluScore` | number\|null | MMLU score (0-100) |
| `humanEvalScore` | number\|null | HumanEval code gen score (0-100) |
| `mathScore` | number\|null | MATH score (0-100) |
| `mtBenchScore` | number\|null | MT-Bench score (0-10) |
| `latencyTTFTMs` | string | Time-to-first-token latency |
| `throughputTPS` | string | Tokens per second range |
| `bestFor` | string | Recommended use cases |
## Providers Covered (7)
- **OpenAI** (GPT-4.1, GPT-4.1 mini, o3, o4-mini)
- **Anthropic** (Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Haiku 4.5, Claude Opus 4.5)
- **Google** (Gemini 2.5 Pro, Gemini 2.5 Flash)
- **Meta** (Llama 4 Scout, Llama 4 Maverick)
- **DeepSeek** (DeepSeek V3, DeepSeek R1)
- **Mistral AI** (Mistral Large 3, Mistral Small 3.2)
- **Cohere** (Command A)
## Usage Examples
### Python (pandas)
```python
import pandas as pd
df = pd.read_csv("data/llm-model-comparison-2026.csv")
# Cheapest models by output cost
print(df.sort_values("output_cost_per_1m_usd")[["model", "provider", "input_cost_per_1m_usd", "output_cost_per_1m_usd"]].head(5))
# Open-source models only
open_source = df[df["open_source"] == True]
print(open_source[["model", "provider", "mmlu_score", "input_cost_per_1m_usd"]])
# Models with 1M+ context window
big_context = df[df["context_window"].isin(["1M", "10M"])]
print(big_context[["model", "context_window", "input_cost_per_1m_usd"]])
```
### JavaScript / Node.js
```javascript
import data from "./data/llm-model-comparison-2026.json" assert { type: "json" };
// Find cheapest model with function calling
const withTools = data.records
.filter(r => r.functionCalling)
.sort((a, b) => a.inputCostPer1M - b.inputCostPer1M);
console.log(`Cheapest with tools: ${withTools[0].model} ($${withTools[0].inputCostPer1M}/1M)`);
// Compare benchmark scores
data.records
.filter(r => r.mmluScore !== null)
.sort((a, b) => b.mmluScore - a.mmluScore)
.forEach(r => console.log(`${r.model}: MMLU ${r.mmluScore}`));
```
### R
```r
library(readr)
df <- read_csv("data/llm-model-comparison-2026.csv")
# Cost per million tokens by provider
aggregate(cbind(input_cost_per_1m_usd, output_cost_per_1m_usd) ~ provider, data = df, FUN = mean)
# Highest benchmark scores
df[order(-df$mmlu_score), c("model", "mmlu_score", "humaneval_score", "math_score")]
```
## Methodology
This dataset combines three categories of data:
1. **Specifications and pricing:** Sourced from official provider documentation and API pricing pages as of February 2026. Pricing reflects pay-as-you-go rates in USD. Open-source model pricing reflects median costs across inference providers (Together AI, Groq, Fireworks AI, DeepInfra).
2. **Benchmark scores:** MMLU, HumanEval, MATH, and MT-Bench scores from original model papers, provider technical reports, or verified third-party evaluations (LMSYS Chatbot Arena, Stanford HELM, Artificial Analysis). Null values indicate no verified score published.
3. **Latency and throughput:** TTFT and tokens-per-second measured with standardized prompts (500-token input, 200-token output) against production API endpoints from US-East. Median of 100 sequential requests during off-peak hours.
See [METHODOLOGY.md](METHODOLOGY.md) for full details.
## Update Schedule
This comparison is updated **quarterly** to reflect new model releases, pricing changes, and benchmark updates. The current version is **Q1 2026 v2**, last updated **February 18, 2026**.
See [CHANGELOG.md](CHANGELOG.md) for version history.
## Citation
If you use this dataset in your research, article, or product, please cite:
```
Salt Technologies AI. (2026). LLM Model Comparison for Enterprise Use Cases (2026) [Dataset].
https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026/
```
BibTeX:
```bibtex
@dataset{salttechnologiesai_2026_llm_comparison,
title = {LLM Model Comparison for Enterprise Use Cases (2026)},
author = {{Salt Technologies AI}},
year = {2026},
publisher = {Salt Technologies AI},
url = {https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026/},
license = {CC BY 4.0}
}
```
A `CITATION.cff` file is included for automated citation tools.
## License
This dataset is released under the [Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
You are free to:
- **Share** — copy and redistribute the data in any medium or format
- **Adapt** — remix, transform, and build upon the data for any purpose, including commercial
As long as you:
- **Give attribution** — credit Salt Technologies AI and link to the [dataset page](https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/llm-model-comparison-2026/)
## About the Publisher
**[Salt Technologies AI](https://www.salttechno.ai)** is the AI engineering division of [Salt Technologies](https://www.salttechno.com), a software development company with 14+ years of experience, 800+ projects delivered, and a team of 100+ engineers. Rated 4.9 on Clutch.
We build AI chatbots, RAG systems, AI agents, and workflow automation for SaaS, healthcare, fintech, and e-commerce companies.
- Website: [Custom AI Development Company](https://www.salttechno.ai)
- Datasets: [www.salttechno.ai/datasets](https://www.salttechno.ai/datasets/)
- Service: [AI Readyness Audit](https://www.salttechno.ai/services/ai-readiness-audit/)
- Service: [AI Chatbot Development](https://www.salttechno.ai/services/ai-chatbot-development/)
- Contact: [www.salttechno.ai/contact](https://www.salttechno.ai/contact/)
|