SQL · 4 checks · max 500 tokens · benched 2026-11-05
Meta models side by side on "Products over 100 units with HAVING": Llama 4 Maverick scores 10/10; Llama 4 Maverick is the cheapest answer scoring 8+ at $0.04 per 1,000 runs. Outputs, checks, judge reasons, latency and cost.
System
You are a database engineer. Reply with a single SQL statement and nothing else.
User
Tables: products(id, name) and order_items(product_id, quantity). Write one standard SQL query that lists product names whose total quantity sold across all order_items is greater than 100. Filter the aggregate with a HAVING clause.
Rubric for the judge: Join, SUM(quantity), GROUP BY product, HAVING > 100; returns names only; no WHERE on the aggregate.
Every cell is one OpenRouter call at temperature 0 with the prompt's token cap and reasoning effort "low" where the model supports it. Cost is usage × the catalogue rate in models.json. Quality is one judge call to anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5 against the prompt's rubric, cached per prompt version.
meta/muse-spark-1.3
88 in · 406 out (344 reasoning) · 19 words · checks 4/4
SELECT p.name FROM products p JOIN order_items oi ON p.id = oi.product_id GROUP BY p.name HAVING SUM(oi.quantity) > 100;
Judge: Query correctly joins tables, groups by product name, uses SUM(quantity) in HAVING clause to filter aggregates > 100, returns only names, and contains no WHERE clause on the aggregate.
meta/muse-glimmer-30b
90 in · 168 out (136 reasoning) · 22 words · checks 4/4
```sql SELECT p.name FROM products p JOIN order_items oi ON p.id = oi.product_id GROUP BY p.id, p.name HAVING SUM(oi.quantity) > 100; ```
Judge: Query correctly joins products and order_items, groups by product, uses HAVING with SUM(quantity) > 100, returns only names, and contains no WHERE clause on the aggregate.
meta-llama/llama-4-maverick
78 in · 37 out · 21 words · checks 4/4
```sql SELECT p.name FROM products p JOIN order_items oi ON p.id = oi.product_id GROUP BY p.name HAVING SUM(oi.quantity) > 100; ```
Judge: Query correctly joins products and order_items, groups by product name, uses HAVING with SUM(quantity) > 100, returns only names, and contains no WHERE clause filtering the aggregate.
meta-llama/llama-4-scout
78 in · 113 out · 62 words · checks 4/4
```sql SELECT p.name FROM products p JOIN ( SELECT product_id, SUM(quantity) as total_quantity FROM order_items GROUP BY product_id ) oi ON p.id = oi.product_id WHERE oi.total_quantity > 100; ``` Alternatively, a more idiomatic SQL query using a HAVING clause would be: ```sql SELECT p.name FROM products p JOIN order_items oi ON p.id = oi.product_id GROUP BY p.name HAVING SUM(oi.quantity) > 100; ```
Judge: The second query correctly uses JOIN, SUM, GROUP BY, and HAVING as required; however, the output includes unnecessary commentary and the first query violates the rubric by using WHERE instead of HAVING on the aggregate.
SQL: Join, SUM(quantity), GROUP BY product, HAVING > 100; returns names only; no WHERE on the aggregate. The deterministic checks are regex, regex, regex, regex.
If the judge's bar of 8/10 is good enough for you, Llama 4 Maverick at $0.04 per 1,000 runs. If you need the top score, Llama 4 Maverick at $0.04 per 1,000 runs.
Run it yourself
Re-run this prompt on Meta with your own OpenRouter key, or tweak the wording and see what changes.
More Meta prompts
If our calculators helped you cut down on hidden AI wallet leaks, thanks for using them. A tiny fraction of your savings is what keeps our pricing indexes updated daily.
Not sure which AI is cheapest for your use case? Find out in 30 seconds — no signup required.
AI cost intelligence
Join the OverpayingForAI list for pricing updates, cheaper alternatives, and practical buying guidance.
Now tracking 50+ AI tools, models, platforms, subscriptions, coding tools, and automation products.