Battle of the Models

Compare specific LLM models, context windows, and capabilities.

No matches found
VS
No matches found

GPT-4o (via routing)

S-TIER

Requesty

Intelligence Score 92/100
Model Popularity 0 votes
Context Window 128K
Pricing Model Commercial / Paid
View Provider Analysis →

LLaVA 1.5

A-TIER

llamafile

Intelligence Score 81/100
Context Window Local
Pricing Model Free / Open
Model Popularity 0 votes
View Provider Analysis →
FINAL VERDICT

GPT-4o (via routing) Wins

With an intelligence score of 92/100 vs 81/100, GPT-4o (via routing) outperforms LLaVA 1.5 by 11 points.

HEAD-TO-HEAD

Detailed Comparison

Feature
GPT-4o (via routing)
LLaVA 1.5
Context Window
128K Local
Architecture
Transformer (Proprietary) Transformer
Est. MMLU Score
~85-87% ~75-79%
Release Date
May-Nov 2024 2024
Pricing Model
Paid / Commercial Free Tier
Rate Limit (RPM)
60 RPM Hardware dependent
Daily Limit
Credit-based Unlimited
Capabilities
Vision
Vision
Performance Tier
A-Tier (Excellent) B-Tier (Strong)
Speed Estimate
Medium Medium
Primary Use Case
General Purpose General Purpose
Model Size
~1.8T (estimated) Undisclosed
Limitations
  • Requires underlying provider API keys
  • Free credit amount is limited
  • Routing adds minimal latency
  • File sizes are large (contain weights)
  • CLI usage often required
  • Windows requires appending .exe
Key Strengths
  • AI Router: automatic provider failover
  • Prompt caching for cost savings
  • Multi-provider load balancing
  • Executable weight files (multi-OS)
  • Integrated Web UI
  • OpenAI Compatible API server

Similar Comparisons

GPT-4o (via routing)
vs
GPT-4o
LLaVA 1.5
vs
GPT-4o
GPT-4o (via routing)
vs
Mistral 7B
LLaVA 1.5
vs
Mistral 7B
GPT-4o (via routing)
vs
TinyLlama
LLaVA 1.5
vs
TinyLlama
LLaVA 1.5
vs
GPT-4o (via Coze)
LLaVA 1.5
vs
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (via routing)
LLaVA 1.5
vs
Llama 3.1 70B (via routing)