Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

Start free brief
BenchLM
Model A
GPT-5.4 Pro

OpenAI

61.2/100

Estimated · Public rank #54

90% interval 44.3–78.1

GPT-5.4 Pro vs Grok 4.5

Updated August 22, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Model B
Grok 4.5

xAI

75.2/100

Supported · Public rank #10

90% interval 70.6–79.8

Decision reading

Grok 4.5 has the higher public score estimate, 75.19 versus 61.24, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.

1 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

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.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    GPT-5.4 Pro

    GPT-5.4 Pro has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Grok 4.5

    Grok 4.5 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

    Grok 4.5

    Grok 4.5 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. GPT-5.4 Pro has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Grok 4.5

    Grok 4.5 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
1
GPT-5.4 Pro only
10
Grok 4.5 only
9
Like-for-like categories
1 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.

Reasoning

Like-for-like
GPT-5.4 Pro
83.3
Grok 4.5
52.6
Weighted basis
1 vs 1 rows
Reading
GPT-5.4 Pro leads

Agentic

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
89.3
Grok 4.5
83.3
Weighted basis
1 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not measured
Grok 4.5
64.7
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
58.7
Grok 4.5
Not measured
Weighted basis
1 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
46.9
Grok 4.5
Not measured
Weighted basis
2 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not measured
Grok 4.5
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
94.0
Grok 4.5
Not measured
Weighted basis
1 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not measured
Grok 4.5
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

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.

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 Pro
$0.12
Fits in one request
Grok 4.5
$0.005
Fits in one request

Grok 4.5 has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Pro
$2.04
Fits in one request
Grok 4.5
$0.118
Fits in one request

Grok 4.5 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 Pro
$8.40
Fits in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Grok 4.5
$0.16
Fits in one request

Grok 4.5 has the lower modeled cost

GPT-5.4 Pro 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.

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

GPT-5.4 Pro

Not published

OpenAI pricing

Grok 4.5

$0.3 per 1M cached input tokens

Provider availability

GPT-5.4 Pro

Generally Available · OpenAI Responses API

OpenAI model catalog

Grok 4.5

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

GPT-5.4 Pro

Reasoning

Grok 4.5

Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-5.4 Pro

Proprietary

Grok 4.5

Proprietary

License

GPT-5.4 Pro

Proprietary

Grok 4.5

Proprietary

Release date

GPT-5.4 Pro

2026-03-05

Grok 4.5

2026-07-08

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 4.5 has the higher public score estimate, 75.19 versus 61.24, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
Workload cost
Repository review: $2.04 vs $0.118. Cache-heavy agent loop: $8.40 vs $0.16.
Context tradeoff
GPT-5.4 Pro has the larger documented window (1.05M).

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 evidence20 rows

Agentic

  • BrowseComp

    GPT-5.4 Pro89.3%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 3.0

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.515.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.583.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • deepSwe

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.553%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Pro

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.564.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.578%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.583.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • cursorBench32

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.566.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VulcanBench v3

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.591.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • ARC-AGI-2

    GPT-5.4 Pro83.3%
    Source
    Grok 4.552.6%
    Source

    GPT-5.4 Pro leads this result

  • ARC-AGI-3

    GPT-5.4 Pro—
    Grok 4.50.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • HLE

    GPT-5.4 Pro58.7%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierScience

    GPT-5.4 Pro36.7%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierScience Research

    GPT-5.4 Pro36.7%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    GPT-5.4 Pro42.7%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • IPhO 2025 (Theory)

    GPT-5.4 Pro93.5%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath (legacy)

    GPT-5.4 Pro50%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    GPT-5.4 Pro50.000%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    GPT-5.4 Pro37.500%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU-Pro

    GPT-5.4 Pro94%
    Source
    Grok 4.5—

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, GPT-5.4 Pro or Grok 4.5?

Grok 4.5 has the higher public score estimate, 75.19 versus 61.24, 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 Pro or Grok 4.5?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 Pro or Grok 4.5?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.

Which costs less, GPT-5.4 Pro or Grok 4.5?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.12 on GPT-5.4 Pro and $0.005 on Grok 4.5; repository review costs $2.04 and $0.118; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $8.40 and $0.16. GPT-5.4 Pro has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-5.4 Pro or Grok 4.5?

GPT-5.4 Pro has the larger documented context window: 1.05M, compared with 500K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated August 22, 2026

Watch GPT-5.4 Pro vs Grok 4.5

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.