Mistral Mistral 8x22B vs Meta Llama 4 Scout

Detailed comparison for LLMs

MistralMeta

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Meta Llama 4 Scout is the more secure of the two: Mistral 8x22B scores 31.5% and Llama 4 Scout scores 30.0% 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 Mistral Mistral 8x22B vs Meta Llama 4 Scout. Green marks the safer model on each metric.

Overall (ASR)

Mistral 8x22B
31.5%
Llama 4 Scout
30.0%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Mistral 8x22B
Llama 4 Scout
63.5%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Mistral 8x22B
Llama 4 Scout
20.3%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Mistral 8x22B
12.2%
Llama 4 Scout
6.1%

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
Mistral 8x22B
Llama 4 Scout
Full security profile
Mistral Mistral 8x22B
Full security profile
Meta Llama 4 Scout

Frequently asked questions

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

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

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

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

How were Mistral 8x22B and Llama 4 Scout 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