Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-5.4 mini
71
Grok 4.20
73
Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 mini only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+18.5 difference
Multimodal
+5.8 difference
GPT-5.4 mini
Grok 4.20
$0.75 / $4.5
$2 / $6
201 t/s
233 t/s
3.85s
10.33s
400K
2M
Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 mini only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Grok 4.20 has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 73 versus 71. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Grok 4.20 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. Grok 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.4 mini.
Grok 4.20 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 73 to 71. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 60% and 47.1%.
GPT-5.4 mini has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.6 versus 47.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GPT-5.4 mini has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.6 versus 70.8. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.