Agentic
Like-for-like- GPT-5.4 nano
- 34.6
- Supported · #133/152
- Grok 4.20
- 26.7
- Supported · #145/152
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 4 public rows
- Reading
- GPT-5.4 nano leads · intervals overlap
GPT-5.4 nano vs Grok 4.20
Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
Grok 4.20 has the higher public score estimate, 67.13 versus 59.57, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.
9 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Share or export
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
GPT-5.4 nano
GPT-5.4 nano leads on the public coding lane, 37.1 to 28.2, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
GPT-5.4 nano
GPT-5.4 nano leads on the public agentic lane, 34.6 to 26.7, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Grok 4.20
Grok 4.20 has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
GPT-5.4 nano
GPT-5.4 nano has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
GPT-5.4 nano
GPT-5.4 nano has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Grok 4.20 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
GPT-5.4 nano
GPT-5.4 nano has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
9 GPT-5.4 nano only
9 Shared
14 Grok 4.20 only
- Shared results
- 9
- GPT-5.4 nano only
- 9
- Grok 4.20 only
- 14
- Like-for-like categories
- 3 / 8
1 category rests on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Coding
Like-for-like- GPT-5.4 nano
- 37.1
- Supported · #126/151
- Grok 4.20
- 28.2
- Supported · #141/151
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 3 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- GPT-5.4 nano leads · intervals overlap
Knowledge
Like-for-like- GPT-5.4 nano
- 47.4
- Supported · #97/183
- Grok 4.20
- 49.4
- Supported · #85/183
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 5 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Grok 4.20 leads · intervals overlap
Multimodal
Directional only- GPT-5.4 nano
- 23.8
- #45/48
- Grok 4.20
- 34.6
- #43/48
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Reasoning
Not comparable- GPT-5.4 nano
- 73.7
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Grok 4.20
- 34.2
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- GPT-5.4 nano
- 43.9
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Grok 4.20
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- GPT-5.4 nano
- Not ranked
- Grok 4.20
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- GPT-5.4 nano
- 93.2
- #9/123
- Grok 4.20
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | GPT-5.4 nano | Grok 4.20 | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 34.6Supported · #133/152 | 26.7Supported · #145/152 | Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 6 vs 4 public rows | GPT-5.4 nano leads · intervals overlap |
| Coding | 37.1Supported · #126/151 | 28.2Supported · #141/151 | Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 3 vs 6 public rows | GPT-5.4 nano leads · intervals overlap |
| Knowledge | 47.4Supported · #97/183 | 49.4Supported · #85/183 | Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 5 vs 6 public rows | Grok 4.20 leads · intervals overlap |
| Multimodal | 23.8#45/48 | 34.6#43/48 | Directional onlyProvisional lane · 1 vs 2 weighted rows | Directional only |
| Reasoning | 73.7Unranked · 2 rankable rows | 34.2Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | 43.9Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | 93.2#9/123 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
MMMU-Pro
Multimodal
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Knowledge
HLE w/o tools
Knowledge
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Agentic
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Coding
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- GPT-5.4 nano
- $0.00082
- Fits in one request
- Grok 4.20
- $0.005
- Fits in one request
GPT-5.4 nano has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- GPT-5.4 nano
- $0.01375
- Fits in one request
- Grok 4.20
- $0.118
- Fits in one request
GPT-5.4 nano has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- GPT-5.4 nano
- $0.0205
- Fits in one request
- Grok 4.20
- $0.5
- Fits in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
GPT-5.4 nano has the lower modeled cost
Grok 4.20 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationGPT-5.4 nanoGrok 4.20
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
GPT-5.4 nano
Grok 4.20
2M
API model ID
GPT-5.4 nano
gpt-5.4-nano
OpenAI GPT-5.4 nano model documentationGrok 4.20
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
GPT-5.4 nano
$0.02 per 1M cached input tokens
OpenAI pricingGrok 4.20
Not published
Documented inputs
GPT-5.4 nano
text, image
OpenAI model catalogGrok 4.20
Not sourced
Documented outputs
GPT-5.4 nano
Grok 4.20
Not sourced
Provider availability
GPT-5.4 nano
Generally Available · OpenAI Responses API
OpenAI model catalogGrok 4.20
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
GPT-5.4 nano
Reasoning
Grok 4.20
Reasoning
Weight access
GPT-5.4 nano
Proprietary
Grok 4.20
Proprietary
License
GPT-5.4 nano
Proprietary
Grok 4.20
Proprietary
Release date
GPT-5.4 nano
2026-03-17
Grok 4.20
2026-03-10
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- Grok 4.20 has the higher public score estimate, 67.13 versus 59.57, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.01375 vs $0.118. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.0205 vs $0.5.
- Context tradeoff
- Grok 4.20 has the larger documented window (2M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence32 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.0
GPT-5.4 nano46.3%SourceGrok 4.2047.1%SourceGrok 4.20 leads this result
OSWorld-Verified
GPT-5.4 nano39%SourceGrok 4.20—Not directly comparable
MCP Atlas
GPT-5.4 nano56.1%SourceGrok 4.20—Not directly comparable
Toolathlon
GPT-5.4 nano35.5%SourceGrok 4.20—Not directly comparable
τ²-bench results
GPT-5.4 nano92.5%SourceGrok 4.20—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
GPT-5.4 nano41.6%SourceGrok 4.2044.2%SourceGrok 4.20 leads this result
DeepSearchQA
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2062.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Gert Labs
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2038.36%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Vibe Code Bench
Shared sourceGPT-5.4 nano26.10%Grok 4.204.06%GPT-5.4 nano leads this result
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
GPT-5.4 nano84.0%SourceGrok 4.2084.3%SourceGrok 4.20 leads this result
SWE-bench (Vals)
GPT-5.4 nano69.8%SourceGrok 4.2072.2%SourceGrok 4.20 leads this result
LiveCodeBench Pro
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2074.2%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2076.7%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2051.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Knowledge
GPQA
GPT-5.4 nano82.8%SourceGrok 4.20—Not directly comparable
HLE
GPT-5.4 nano37.7%SourceGrok 4.20—Not directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
GPT-5.4 nano24.3%SourceGrok 4.2031.6%SourceGrok 4.20 leads this result
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
GPT-5.4 nano77.5%SourceGrok 4.2088.6%SourceGrok 4.20 leads this result
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
GPT-5.4 nano77.2%SourceGrok 4.2086.3%SourceGrok 4.20 leads this result
GPQA-D
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2088.5%SourceNot directly comparable
HealthBench Hard
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2020.3%SourceNot directly comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2050.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Math
Multimodal
MMMU-Pro
GPT-5.4 nano66.1%SourceGrok 4.2075.2%SourceGrok 4.20 leads this result
MMMU-Pro w/ Python
GPT-5.4 nano69.5%SourceGrok 4.20—Not directly comparable
CharXiv
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2060.9%SourceNot directly comparable
ERQA
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2054.1%SourceNot directly comparable
SimpleVQA
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2057.4%SourceNot directly comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)
GPT-5.4 nano—Grok 4.2065.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, GPT-5.4 nano or Grok 4.20?
Grok 4.20 has the higher public score estimate, 67.13 versus 59.57, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 nano or Grok 4.20?
GPT-5.4 nano leads the public coding lane, 37.1 to 28.2, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 nano or Grok 4.20?
GPT-5.4 nano leads the public agentic tasks lane, 34.6 to 26.7, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Which costs less, GPT-5.4 nano or Grok 4.20?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.00082 on GPT-5.4 nano and $0.005 on Grok 4.20; repository review costs $0.01375 and $0.118; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.0205 and $0.5. Grok 4.20 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Which has the larger context window, GPT-5.4 nano or Grok 4.20?
Grok 4.20 has the larger documented context window: 2M, compared with 400K.
Related comparisons
Last updated September 10, 2026
Watch GPT-5.4 nano vs Grok 4.20
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.