# GPT-5.4 mini vs Llama 3.2 1B

> GPT-5.4 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 mini's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-4-mini-vs-llama-3-2-1b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 mini scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.2 1B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GPT-5.4 mini leads 51.5 to 7.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 88.9% for GPT-5.4 mini and 0.6% for Llama 3.2 1B.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.75 / $4.50 for GPT-5.4 mini.
- GPT-5.4 mini accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 60K.
- Llama 3.2 1B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 45.0 | 20.1 |
| Rank | 76 | 354 |
| Context | 400K | 60K |
| Input $/M | $0.75 | $0.027 |
| Output $/M | $4.50 | $0.20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-5.4 mini: 45.2 (#72)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1438 | 1070 |
| FrontierCode | 27% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1397 | — |
| SciCode | 49.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 60.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 8.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 11.3% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,189 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-5.4 mini: 29.9 (#81)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 10.8% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 36.3% | — |
| BALROG | — | 6.6% |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.4 mini: 30.4 (#85)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 24% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1424 | 1044 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 148.84 | 101.99 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 18.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.9% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 61.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 63.7% | — |
| CritPt | 10% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 61.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 11% | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LMCA | 40.8% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57 | — |

## Math

- GPT-5.4 mini: 45.5 (#75)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 88.9% | 0.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1419 | 1086 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 51.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 9.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 21% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 28.3% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.4 mini: 51.5 (#67)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 86.9% | 23.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1435 | 1007 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 29.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.5% | — |

## Multimodal

- GPT-5.4 mini: 39.7 (#56)
- Llama 3.2 1B: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1245 | — |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.4 mini: 51.9 (#96)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1446 | 959 |
| LMArena German | 1409 | 1014 |
| LMArena Russian | 1417 | 941 |
| LMArena French | 1440 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1374 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1368 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1405 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.4 mini: 74.1 (#102)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1031 |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.4 mini: 43.0 (#112)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1407 | 1050 |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.4 mini: 64.0 (#58)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1412 | 1055 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1370 | 1033 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1665 | 200 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1429 | 1030 |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.4 mini better than Llama 3.2 1B?

GPT-5.4 mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 mini's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 mini or Llama 3.2 1B?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 mini lists at $0.75 and $4.50.

### Is GPT-5.4 mini or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?

GPT-5.4 mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.2 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.4 mini does, with 400K tokens against 60K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 mini and Llama 3.2 1B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 mini has 46 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.