Model comparison
Celeris-1 vs GPT-5.4 nano
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Celeris-1 unranked (Not scored); GPT-5.4 nano #25 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Celeris-1 and GPT-5.4 nano share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Celeris-1; 29 to GPT-5.4 nano.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Celeris-1 only
- 1
- GPT-5.4 nano only
- 29
- 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 nano 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 nano 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 $0.20 input / $1.25 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.4 nano. That is roughly 4.8x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 nano 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 nano 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.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | GPT-5.4 nano | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Celeris-1$2 input / $6 output | GPT-5.4 nano$0.2 input / $1.25 output | GPT-5.4 nano has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Celeris-1Not available | GPT-5.4 nano191 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Celeris-1Not available | GPT-5.4 nano3.64 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Celeris-18K | GPT-5.4 nano400K | GPT-5.4 nano lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | GPT-5.4 nano | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 46.3% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 39% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 56.1% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 35.5% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 76% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 27.5% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 24.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 30.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1100 | Not comparable |
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeCeleris-1 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | GPT-5.4 nano | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 75.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 82.8% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 37.7% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 24.3% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 38.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 81.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 26.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -29.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 25.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 73.6% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | GPT-5.4 nano | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 75.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Celeris-1 or GPT-5.4 nano?
Celeris-1 and GPT-5.4 nano 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 nano?
Celeris-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.9 versus 43.8. GPT-5.4 nano stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.