Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Pick Reka Flash 3.1 for a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists) or strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original flash 3.
Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) and Reka Flash 3.1 (Reka AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Reka Flash 3.1 is reka AI's compact 21B open-weight reasoning model - small enough to run locally, from a team of DeepMind and Meta alumni. Their biggest split is context window, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences
Context window: Llama 4 Maverick holds 31× more — 1M (~1,500 pages) vs 32K (~49 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: Reka Flash 3.1 is the newer model by about 3 months (released July 2025), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Llama 4 Maverick
Reka Flash 3.1
Provider
Meta (US)
Reka AI (US)
Released
April 2025
July 2025
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
32K (~49 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Open weights, 1M context: Llama 4 Maverick — Its 1M window holds about 31× more than Reka Flash 3.1's 32K in a single prompt.
Strong image + text understanding: Llama 4 Maverick — Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments — and it carries the larger 1M context.
Self-hostable: Llama 4 Maverick — Llama 4 Maverick lists self-hostable among its strengths; Reka Flash 3.1 does not.
A 21B-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists): Reka Flash 3.1 — Llama 4 Maverick is comparatively weak here — trails closed frontier on reasoning
Strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original Flash 3: Reka Flash 3.1 — Reka AI's compact 21B open-weight reasoning model - small enough to run locally, from a team of DeepMind and Meta alumni — and it is the newer of the two.
Fully open weights (Apache 2.0) from a frontier-caliber research team: Reka Flash 3.1 — Reka Flash 3.1 lists fully open weights (Apache 2.0) from a frontier-caliber research team among its strengths; Llama 4 Maverick does not.
Largest single-prompt input: Llama 4 Maverick — Its 1M window is about 31× larger than Reka Flash 3.1's 32K, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Llama 4 Maverick — Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is open weights, 1m context: Llama 4 Maverick — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists): Reka Flash 3.1 — That is its strongest area.
Llama 4 Maverick: where it fits
Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Released April 2025 by Meta, it is built for open weights, 1M context, strong image + text understanding, self-hostable, and 400B MoE, 17B active.
Its trade-offs are real: needs serious hardware to self-host, and trails closed frontier on reasoning. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
Reka Flash 3.1: where it fits
Reka AI's compact 21B open-weight reasoning model - small enough to run locally, from a team of DeepMind and Meta alumni. Released July 2025 by Reka AI, it is built for a 21B-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists), strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original Flash 3, fully open weights (Apache 2.0) from a frontier-caliber research team, and built by alumni from Google DeepMind and Meta's AI labs.
Its trade-offs: a relatively small 32K context window next to million-token frontier models, smaller and less capable overall than flagship frontier models from major labs, and reka's broader roadmap has shifted toward robotics/world models after merging with Moonvalley in June 2026, raising questions about ongoing LLM investment. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
Llama 4 Maverick and Reka Flash 3.1 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Llama 4 Maverick holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context, Reka Flash 3.1 for a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists). Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 4 Maverick or Reka Flash 3.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Llama 4 Maverick leans toward open weights, 1m context while Reka Flash 3.1 leans toward a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Maverick or Reka Flash 3.1?
They are priced almost identically, so cost will not decide between them.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama 4 Maverick — 1M vs 32K, about 31× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Llama 4 Maverick and Reka Flash 3.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Llama 4 Maverick, Reka Flash 3.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Llama 4 Maverick or Reka Flash 3.1?
Reka Flash 3.1 — released July 2025, about 3 months after Llama 4 Maverick.
Llama 4 Maverick vs Reka Flash 3.1
Meta · US | Reka AI · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Pick Reka Flash 3.1 for a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists) or strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original flash 3.
Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) and Reka Flash 3.1 (Reka AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Reka Flash 3.1 is reka AI's compact 21B open-weight reasoning model - small enough to run locally, from a team of DeepMind and Meta alumni. Their biggest split is context window, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences at a glance
▸Context window: Llama 4 Maverick holds 31× more — 1M (~1,500 pages) vs 32K (~49 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: Reka Flash 3.1 is the newer model by about 3 months (released July 2025), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Llama 4 Maverick
Reka Flash 3.1
Provider
Meta (US)
Reka AI (US)
Released
April 2025
July 2025
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
32K (~49 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Open weights, 1M context
Llama 4 Maverick
Its 1M window holds about 31× more than Reka Flash 3.1's 32K in a single prompt.
Strong image + text understanding
Llama 4 Maverick
Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments — and it carries the larger 1M context.
Self-hostable
Llama 4 Maverick
Llama 4 Maverick lists self-hostable among its strengths; Reka Flash 3.1 does not.
A 21B-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists)
Reka Flash 3.1
Llama 4 Maverick is comparatively weak here — trails closed frontier on reasoning
Strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original Flash 3
Reka Flash 3.1
Reka AI's compact 21B open-weight reasoning model - small enough to run locally, from a team of DeepMind and Meta alumni — and it is the newer of the two.
Fully open weights (Apache 2.0) from a frontier-caliber research team
Reka Flash 3.1
Reka Flash 3.1 lists fully open weights (Apache 2.0) from a frontier-caliber research team among its strengths; Llama 4 Maverick does not.
Largest single-prompt input
Llama 4 Maverick
Its 1M window is about 31× larger than Reka Flash 3.1's 32K, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Llama 4 Maverick
Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is open weights, 1m context
→ Llama 4 Maverick
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists)
→ Reka Flash 3.1
That is its strongest area.
Llama 4 Maverick: where it fits
Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Released April 2025 by Meta, it is built for open weights, 1M context, strong image + text understanding, self-hostable, and 400B MoE, 17B active.
Its trade-offs are real: needs serious hardware to self-host, and trails closed frontier on reasoning. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
Reka Flash 3.1: where it fits
Reka AI's compact 21B open-weight reasoning model - small enough to run locally, from a team of DeepMind and Meta alumni. Released July 2025 by Reka AI, it is built for a 21B-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists), strong base for fine-tuning agentic tasks - notably improved coding since the original Flash 3, fully open weights (Apache 2.0) from a frontier-caliber research team, and built by alumni from Google DeepMind and Meta's AI labs.
Its trade-offs: a relatively small 32K context window next to million-token frontier models, smaller and less capable overall than flagship frontier models from major labs, and reka's broader roadmap has shifted toward robotics/world models after merging with Moonvalley in June 2026, raising questions about ongoing LLM investment. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
Llama 4 Maverick and Reka Flash 3.1 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Llama 4 Maverick holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context, Reka Flash 3.1 for a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists). Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Llama 4 Maverick and Reka Flash 3.1 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is Llama 4 Maverick or Reka Flash 3.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Llama 4 Maverick leans toward open weights, 1m context while Reka Flash 3.1 leans toward a 21b-parameter reasoning model, small enough for local/on-device deployment (a 3.5-bit quantized build exists), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Maverick or Reka Flash 3.1?
They are priced almost identically, so cost will not decide between them.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama 4 Maverick — 1M vs 32K, about 31× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Llama 4 Maverick and Reka Flash 3.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Llama 4 Maverick, Reka Flash 3.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Llama 4 Maverick or Reka Flash 3.1?
Reka Flash 3.1 — released July 2025, about 3 months after Llama 4 Maverick.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.