Model comparison
GPT-5.4 vs Grok 4.5
Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 #8 (Supported); Grok 4.5 #7 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 and Grok 4.5 share 17 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 35 results are unique to GPT-5.4; 11 to Grok 4.5.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- GPT-5.4 only
- 35
- Grok 4.5 only
- 11
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Grok 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1.05M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Grok 4.5 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 76.72 versus 74.24. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Grok 4.5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 64.7 against 57.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 75.1% to 83.3%.
GPT-5.4 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.50 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens for Grok 4.5. That is roughly 2.5x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 500K for Grok 4.5.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | GPT-5.4 | Δ | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | GPT-5.457.7 | Margin→ 7.0 | Grok 4.564.7 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.477.2 | Margin→ 6.1 | Grok 4.583.3 |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.457.6 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.5Not measured |
| Math | GPT-5.442.5 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.5Not measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.473.2 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.5Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 75.1%B 83.3%Winner: Grok 4.5Δ 8.2Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.4 scored 75.1%; Grok 4.5 scored 83.3%. Grok 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 57.7%B 64.7%Winner: Grok 4.5Δ 7SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.4 scored 57.7%; Grok 4.5 scored 64.7%. Grok 4.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 | Grok 4.5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 output | Grok 4.5$2 input / $6 output | Grok 4.5 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.474 tok/s | Grok 4.5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.4151.79 s | Grok 4.5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.41.05M | Grok 4.5500K | GPT-5.4 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGrok 4.5 wins24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Grok 4.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 75.1% | 83.3% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| CyberGymSource | 79.0% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 82.7% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 75% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 54.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 60.3% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | 73.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 41.1% | 45.7% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 33.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 44.7% | 51.7% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1395 | 1535 | Grok 4.5 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.89% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 38.9% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 6.0% | — | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | — | 53% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1323 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 51.4% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 40.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 92.4% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 32.6% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 81.6% | Not comparable |
CodingGrok 4.5 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Grok 4.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.7% | 64.7% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| React Native EvalsSource | 85.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 67.42% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.0% | 72.5% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 56.6% | 54.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 78% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 83.3% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 66.7% | Not comparable |
| VulcanBench v3Source | — | 91.3% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Grok 4.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 92.8% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 52.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 39.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.8% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 40.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | 59.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 51.4% | 53.8% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.0% | 93.1% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 41.6% | 40.3% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 5.7% | 26.4% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 50.0% | 52.1% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 88.6% | 53.5% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 48.1% | — | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Grok 4.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 81.2% | — | Not comparable |
| OfficeQA ProSource | 53.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | 82.1% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 82.8% | — | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | 65.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | 61.1% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 85.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | 41.0% | — | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | 77.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 78.4% | 80.4% | Grok 4.5 leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1250 | 1325 | Grok 4.5 leads |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Grok 4.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.9% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, GPT-5.4 or Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 76.72 to 74.24. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 75.1% and 83.3%.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 or Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.7 versus 57.7. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 or Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.3 versus 77.2. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.