Model comparison

GPT-5.4 nano vs Llama 13b

GPT-5.4 nano is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.4 nano OpenAI

41.9

Rank #111 Confirmed

Llama 13b Meta

23.9

Rank #344 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 nano scores higher in 6 categories and Llama 13b in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GPT-5.4 nano leads 55.9 to 13.9.
  • Llama 13b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.4 nano and Llama 13b specifications
GPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
ProviderOpenAIMeta
Noometry Index41.923.9
Released2026-03-172023-02-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.20—
Output $ / M tokens$1.25—
Results tracked4021

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.4 nano leads

GPT-5.4 nano: 43.1 (#82), Llama 13b: 20.9 (#332)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
LMArena Coding1404683
SciCode46.9%—
WeirdML49.2%—
ALE-Bench1,005—

Reasoning GPT-5.4 nano leads

GPT-5.4 nano: 23.8 (#159), Llama 13b: 13.4 (#327)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
LMArena Hard Prompts1380728
Epoch Capabilities Index145.78100.09
ARC-AGI-25.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark39.7%—
ARC-AGI-151.5%—
CritPt9.3%—
Chess Puzzles30%—
Mystery Game Puzzles9%—
DTBench80.3%—
LMCA36.9%—
BIG-Bench Hard—37.9%
ForecastBench57.3—
HellaSwag—79.2%
LAMBADA—75.2%
PIQA—80.1%
WinoGrande—73%

Math GPT-5.4 nano leads

GPT-5.4 nano: 40.7 (#76), Llama 13b: 24.4 (#259)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
LMArena Math1406838
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)44.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 412.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202587.8%—
ProofBench5%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)25.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)6.3%—
GSM8K—20.6%

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5.4 nano: 41.8 (#94), Llama 13b: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
GPQA Diamond78.5%—
SimpleQA Verified11.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate3.1%—
LMArena Expert1397—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—52.7%
BoolQ—78.7%
MMLU—47.7%
OpenBookQA—56.4%
TriviaQA—77.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.4 nano: 36.0 (#73), Llama 13b: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
LMArena Vision1196—
ScienceQA—43.3%

Multilingual GPT-5.4 nano leads

GPT-5.4 nano: 48.8 (#136), Llama 13b: 16.8 (#292)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
LMArena Non-English1359819
LMArena Chinese1391—
LMArena French1396—
LMArena German1368—
LMArena Japanese1342—
LMArena Korean1321—
LMArena Russian1363—
LMArena Spanish1368—

Instruction Following GPT-5.4 nano leads

GPT-5.4 nano: 72.1 (#139), Llama 13b: 36.9 (#300)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
LMArena Instruction Following1362781

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.4 nano: 41.6 (#131), Llama 13b: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
LMArena Longer Query1365—

Writing & Preference GPT-5.4 nano leads

GPT-5.4 nano: 55.9 (#137), Llama 13b: 13.9 (#307)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 nanoLlama 13b
LMArena Text1372834
LMArena Creative Writing1313794
LMArena Multi-Turn1382753

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.4 nano better than Llama 13b?

GPT-5.4 nano is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-5.4 nano or Llama 13b better for coding?

GPT-5.4 nano scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.1 versus 20.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 nano and Llama 13b share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 nano has 40 scored results on Noometry and Llama 13b has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper