Meta Llama 4 Scout vs Mistral Mixtral 8x7B
Detailed comparison for LLMs
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Meta Llama 4 Scout is the more secure of the two: Llama 4 Scout scores 30.0% and Mixtral 8x7B scores 38.0% 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 Mixtral 8x7B. Green marks the safer model on each metric.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
- Meta Llama 4 Scout has a lower Overall (ASR).
- Meta Llama 4 Scout has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
- Meta Llama 4 Scout has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).
- Meta Llama 4 Scout has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Meta Llama 4 Scout or Mistral Mixtral 8x7B 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 Mixtral 8x7B scores 38.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better).
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Llama 4 Scout vs Mixtral 8x7B?
Llama 4 Scout has a 30.0% ASR and Mixtral 8x7B has a 38.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Llama 4 Scout and Mixtral 8x7B 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.