Head-to-head - ScaleDown

Every figure is ScaleDown measured against that provider’s average across its models on the same task. Accuracy is the gain in score; cost and latency are how many times cheaper or faster ScaleDown is. Datasets and metrics are in Methodology.

OpenAI

Models compared: GPT-5.5, GPT-5.4 Mini, GPT-5.4 Nano

8.72% higher accuracy

than the OpenAI avg

89× cheaper

than the OpenAI avg

2.4× faster

than the OpenAI avg

Task	Accuracy	Cost	Latency
Classify	+5.40%	1,810× cheaper	2.6× faster
Extract	+14.40%	35× cheaper	3.3× faster
Summarize	+8.83%	41× cheaper	2.7× faster
Compress	+6.23%	138× cheaper	1.8× faster

Full ScaleDown vs OpenAI charts and cost tables

Anthropic

Models compared: Fable 5, Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6, Haiku 4.5

8.0% higher accuracy

than the Anthropic avg

161× cheaper

than the Anthropic avg

3.8× faster

than the Anthropic avg

Task	Accuracy	Cost	Latency
Classify	+2.29%	5,250× cheaper	3.6× faster
Extract	+13.33%	91× cheaper	3.2× faster
Summarize	+8.22%	217× cheaper	4.4× faster

Full ScaleDown vs Anthropic charts and cost tables

Gemini

Models compared: 3.1 Pro, 3.5 Flash, 3.1 Flash-Lite

9.0% higher accuracy

than the Gemini avg

29× cheaper

than the Gemini avg

8.3× faster

than the Gemini avg

Task	Accuracy	Cost	Latency
Classify	+2.10%	2,437× cheaper	13.8× faster
Extract	+10.34%	26× cheaper	13.4× faster
Summarize	+14.70%	28× cheaper	2.6× faster

Full ScaleDown vs Gemini charts and cost tables

Grok

Models compared: Grok 4.3, Grok 4.2

7.93% higher accuracy

than the Grok avg

24× cheaper

than the Grok avg

2.2× faster

than the Grok avg

Task	Accuracy	Cost	Latency
Classify	+1.45%	1,161× cheaper	2.3× faster
Extract	+12.30%	22× cheaper	2.3× faster
Summarize	+10.05%	25× cheaper	2.1× faster

Full ScaleDown vs Grok charts and cost tables

DeepSeek

Models compared: DeepSeek V4 Pro, DeepSeek V4 Flash

19.5% higher accuracy

than the DeepSeek avg

9× cheaper

than the DeepSeek avg

4.1× faster

than the DeepSeek avg

Task	Accuracy	Cost	Latency
Classify	+20.75%	113× cheaper	3.7× faster
Extract	+31.03%	9× cheaper	3.9× faster
Summarize	+6.73%	10× cheaper	4.4× faster

Full ScaleDown vs DeepSeek charts and cost tables

Qwen

Models compared: Qwen3.8 Max, Qwen3.8 27B, Qwen3.5 4B

16.71% higher accuracy

than the Qwen avg

24× cheaper

than the Qwen avg

13.9× faster

than the Qwen avg

Task	Accuracy	Cost	Latency
Classify	+9.12%	761× cheaper	7.2× faster
Extract	+31.98%	18× cheaper	26.1× faster
Summarize	+9.04%	28× cheaper	9.2× faster

Full ScaleDown vs Qwen charts and cost tables

GLiNER

Model compared: GLiNER2.5-multi-v1, a local open-source model for classification and extraction. GLiNER is the one comparison where ScaleDown is not the faster or cheaper option. GLiNER runs locally, so inference is free, and it is faster, while ScaleDown is more accurate.

Task	Accuracy (ScaleDown vs GLiNER)	GLiNER latency	Cost
Classify	+15.5 pp for ScaleDown	22 ms	GLiNER free (local inference)
Extract	+0.2 pp for ScaleDown	480 ms	GLiNER free (local inference)

Averaged across both tasks, ScaleDown’s accuracy advantage is +10.5%. Full ScaleDown vs GLiNER charts

​OpenAI

8.72% higher accuracy

89× cheaper

2.4× faster

​Anthropic

8.0% higher accuracy

161× cheaper

3.8× faster

​Gemini

9.0% higher accuracy

29× cheaper

8.3× faster

​Grok

7.93% higher accuracy

24× cheaper

2.2× faster

​DeepSeek

19.5% higher accuracy

9× cheaper

4.1× faster

​Qwen

16.71% higher accuracy

24× cheaper

13.9× faster

​GLiNER

OpenAI

Anthropic

Gemini

Grok

DeepSeek

Qwen

GLiNER