Model comparison
Cosmos3-Edge vs GPT-5.4
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: Cosmos3-Edge unranked (Not scored); GPT-5.4 #8 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Cosmos3-Edge and GPT-5.4 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Cosmos3-Edge; 52 to GPT-5.4.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Cosmos3-Edge only
- 0
- GPT-5.4 only
- 52
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Cosmos3-Edge and GPT-5.4 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM does not have sourced benchmark coverage for Cosmos3-Edge yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.
GPT-5.4 is priced at $2.50 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Cosmos3-Edge. GPT-5.4 has the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 256K for Cosmos3-Edge.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Cosmos3-Edge | GPT-5.4 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Cosmos3-Edge$0 input / $0 output | GPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 output | Cosmos3-Edge has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Cosmos3-EdgeNot available | GPT-5.474 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Cosmos3-EdgeNot available | GPT-5.4151.79 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Cosmos3-Edge256K | GPT-5.41.05M | GPT-5.4 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Cosmos3-Edge | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 75.1% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 79.0% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 82.7% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 75% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 70.6% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 54.6% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 87.1% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 60.3% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 73.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 41.1% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 44.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1395 | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 64.89% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 15.3% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 6.0% | Not comparable |
Coding6 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Cosmos3-Edge | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 52.1% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 39.8% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 40.1% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | — | 59.6% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 51.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 92.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 41.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 5.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 50.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 88.6% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | — | 48.1% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Cosmos3-Edge | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 53.2% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 82.8% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 65.4% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 61.1% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 77.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.4% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1250 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Cosmos3-Edge | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 73.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Cosmos3-Edge and GPT-5.4 on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Cosmos3-Edge and GPT-5.4 today?
Cosmos3-Edge: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens GPT-5.4: $2.50 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
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.