Model comparison
GPT-5.4 Pro vs Grok 4.5
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 55.0 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.5 costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 Pro scores higher in 3 categories and Grok 4.5 in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.4 Pro leads 70.7 to 56.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath Tier 4: 58.5% for GPT-5.4 Pro and 24.4% for Grok 4.5.
- Grok 4.5 is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GPT-5.4 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 500K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 58.9 | 55.0 |
| Released | 2026-03-05 | 2026-07-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 500K |
| Max output | 128K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $30 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $180 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 43.2 (#90), Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 57.4% | 46.4% |
| DeepSWE | — | 53.8% |
| FrontierCode | — | 42.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1553 |
| SciCode | — | 54.1% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1474 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,309 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: —, Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 56.2% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 47.9% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 23.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 65.4% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 14% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1213 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,887 |
Reasoning GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 70.7 (#13), Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 83.3% | 52.6% |
| SimpleBench | 74.1% | 70% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94.5% | 87.2% |
| CritPt | 30% | 15.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 58.6% | 36% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.93 | 153.92 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 83.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 79.9% |
| EnigmaEval | 23.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1462 |
| DTBench | — | 96.5% |
| LMCA | — | 45.2% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 74.4% |
Math GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 72.4 (#22), Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 82.5% | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 58.5% | 24.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 97.8% |
| ProofBench | — | 31% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1459 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 50% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 37.5% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 68.3 (#7), Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.6% | 93.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.3% | 48.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 44.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1466 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: —, Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1288 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 27.3% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 22.5% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1452 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: —, Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1496 |
| LMArena French | — | 1456 |
| LMArena German | — | 1446 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1428 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1404 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1448 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1450 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: —, Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1446 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: —, Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1463 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: —, Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1448 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1442 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1579 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1456 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 Pro better than Grok 4.5?
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 55.0 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.5 costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Pro or Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.5 is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 Pro lists at $30 and $180.
Is GPT-5.4 Pro or Grok 4.5 better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 43.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 500K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 Pro and Grok 4.5 share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 Pro has 16 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.5 has 52.