Skip to main content

Model comparison

Celeris-1 vs GPT-5.4 mini

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

No sourced benchmark result is currently shared by both models. This page therefore compares only the available metadata, pricing, and runtime rows; it does not name a quality winner.
Celeris
N/A
No comparison
56.77/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Celeris-1 unranked (Not scored); GPT-5.4 mini #75 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Celeris-1 and GPT-5.4 mini share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Celeris-1; 30 to GPT-5.4 mini.

Updated July 24, 2026
Shared results
0
Celeris-1 only
1
GPT-5.4 mini only
30
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Celeris-1 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; GPT-5.4 mini is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 400K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Celeris-1 and GPT-5.4 mini finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Celeris-1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.75 input / $4.50 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.4 mini. GPT-5.4 mini is the reasoning model in the pair, while Celeris-1 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 mini gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 8K for Celeris-1.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricCeleris-1GPT-5.4 miniComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensCeleris-1$2 input / $6 outputGPT-5.4 mini$0.75 input / $4.5 outputGPT-5.4 mini has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondCeleris-1Not availableGPT-5.4 mini201 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenCeleris-1Not availableGPT-5.4 mini3.85 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensCeleris-18KGPT-5.4 mini400KGPT-5.4 mini lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkCeleris-1GPT-5.4 miniResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 60%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 72.1%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 57.7%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 42.9%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 83.3%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 30.2%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 28.2%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 33.6%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1171Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkCeleris-1GPT-5.4 miniResult
Vibe Code BenchSource 47.97%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 56.1%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 49.9%Not comparable
FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource 27.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkCeleris-1GPT-5.4 miniResult
AA-LCRSource 69.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 10.0%Not comparable
KnowledgeCeleris-1 wins
BenchmarkCeleris-1GPT-5.4 miniResult
MMLU-ProSource 75.9%Not comparable
GPQASource 88%Not comparable
HLESource 41.5%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 28.2%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 40.0%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 87.5%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 26.6%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -18.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 37.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 89.8%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkCeleris-1GPT-5.4 miniResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 28.280%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 2.080%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkCeleris-1GPT-5.4 miniResult
MMMU-ProSource 76.6%Not comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource 78%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 73.3%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkCeleris-1GPT-5.4 miniResult
AA-IFBenchSource 73.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Celeris-1 or GPT-5.4 mini?

Celeris-1 and GPT-5.4 mini are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Celeris-1 or GPT-5.4 mini?

Celeris-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.9 versus 47.8. GPT-5.4 mini stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 24, 2026

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.