Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-5.4 mini
68
Ornith-1.0-35B
67
Pick GPT-5.4 mini if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ornith-1.0-35B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+1.4 difference
GPT-5.4 mini
Ornith-1.0-35B
$0.75 / $4.5
$0 / $0
201 t/s
N/A
3.85s
N/A
400K
262K
Pick GPT-5.4 mini if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ornith-1.0-35B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
GPT-5.4 mini finishes one point ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 68 to 67. That is enough to call, but not enough to treat as a blowout. This matchup comes down to a few meaningful edges rather than one model dominating the board.
GPT-5.4 mini's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 65.6 against 64.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 60% to 64.2%.
GPT-5.4 mini is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.75 input / $4.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Ornith-1.0-35B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 mini gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 262K for Ornith-1.0-35B.
GPT-5.4 mini is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 68 to 67. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 60% and 64.2%.
GPT-5.4 mini has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.6 versus 64.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 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.