Meta Llama 4 Scout vs Mistral Mistral 8x22B

Detailed comparison for LLMs

MetaMistral

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Meta Llama 4 Scout is the more secure of the two: Llama 4 Scout scores 30.0% and Mistral 8x22B scores 31.5% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

Head-to-Head Overview

Llama 4 Scout is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Meta Llama 4 Scout vs Mistral Mistral 8x22B. Green marks the safer model on each metric.

Overall (ASR)

Llama 4 Scout
30.0%
Mistral 8x22B
31.5%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Llama 4 Scout
63.5%
Mistral 8x22B

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Llama 4 Scout
20.3%
Mistral 8x22B

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Llama 4 Scout
6.1%
Mistral 8x22B
12.2%

Key Highlights

  • Meta Llama 4 Scout has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • Meta Llama 4 Scout has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Llama 4 Scout
Mistral 8x22B
Full security profile
Meta Llama 4 Scout
Full security profile
Mistral Mistral 8x22B

Frequently asked questions

Is Meta Llama 4 Scout or Mistral Mistral 8x22B more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Meta Llama 4 Scout is the more secure of the two: Llama 4 Scout scores 30.0% and Mistral 8x22B scores 31.5% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Llama 4 Scout vs Mistral 8x22B?

Llama 4 Scout has a 30.0% ASR and Mistral 8x22B has a 31.5% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Llama 4 Scout and Mistral 8x22B tested?

Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.

Related Comparisons