Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-5.4 Pro
91
Holo3-122B-A10B
100
Pick Holo3-122B-A10B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 Pro only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1.05M context window.
Agentic
+10.4 difference
GPT-5.4 Pro
Holo3-122B-A10B
$30 / $180
$0.4 / $3
74 t/s
N/A
151.79s
N/A
1.05M
64K
Pick Holo3-122B-A10B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 Pro only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1.05M context window.
Holo3-122B-A10B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 100 to 91. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $30.00 input / $180.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens for Holo3-122B-A10B. That is roughly 60.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 Pro is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-122B-A10B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-5.4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 64K for Holo3-122B-A10B.
Holo3-122B-A10B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 100 to 91.
GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 89.3 versus 78.9. Holo3-122B-A10B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.