Skip to main content
Radar

Every change to the models you run, with its source and its date. Releases, price changes, retirements, API changes, and incidents.Every change to the models you run, with its source.

Follow model changes

GPT-5.4 Pro vs Llama 4 Maverick

Decision reading

GPT-5.4 Pro has the higher public score, 72.44 versus 22.91, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.

1 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

OpenAI logo
Model A
GPT-5.4 Pro

OpenAI

72.44/100

Estimated · Public rank #12

90% interval 60.984.0

Meta logo
Model B
Llama 4 Maverick

Meta

22.91/100

Supported · Public rank #181

90% interval 17.428.4

Updated September 22, 2026. Rank says GPT-5.4 Pro is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

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

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    GPT-5.4 Pro is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    GPT-5.4 Pro is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

GPT-5.4 Pro23.6Llama 4 Maverick

Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.6

The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

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
9
Llama 4 Maverick only
0
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.6 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.

Agentic

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not ranked
Llama 4 Maverick
12.1
Estimated · #100/104
Basis
BenchAlign v5.6 lane · 1 vs 0 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not ranked
Llama 4 Maverick
23.6
Estimated · #117/135
Basis
BenchAlign v5.6 lane · 0 vs 0 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
70.2
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Llama 4 Maverick
55.4
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not ranked
Llama 4 Maverick
51.6
Unranked · 1 rankable row
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not ranked
Llama 4 Maverick
29.9
Estimated · #127/160
Basis
BenchAlign v5.6 lane · 4 vs 0 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not ranked
Llama 4 Maverick
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
Not ranked
Llama 4 Maverick
48.9
#82/124
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro
68.8
Unranked · 4 rankable rows
Llama 4 Maverick
25.1
Unranked · 1 rankable row
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.6) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional 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.

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math

    GPT-5.4 Pro: 50.000%Llama 4 Maverick: 0.690%Normalized gap 49.3Shared source

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
Llama 4 Maverick
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Llama 4 Maverick has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Pro
$2.04
Fits in one request
Llama 4 Maverick
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Llama 4 Maverick has no comparable published API token rate.

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
Llama 4 Maverick
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

GPT-5.4 Pro has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Llama 4 Maverick has no comparable published API token 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

Llama 4 Maverick

No comparable hosted API rate

Provider availability

GPT-5.4 Pro

Generally Available · OpenAI Responses API

OpenAI model catalog

Llama 4 Maverick

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

GPT-5.4 Pro

Reasoning

Llama 4 Maverick

Non-Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-5.4 Pro

Proprietary

Llama 4 Maverick

Open Weight

License

GPT-5.4 Pro

Proprietary

Llama 4 Maverick

Open Weight

Release date

GPT-5.4 Pro

2026-03-05

Llama 4 Maverick

2026-02-28

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
GPT-5.4 Pro has the higher public score, 72.44 versus 22.91, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
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.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

GPT-5.4 Pro
API / mo$157,500
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Llama 4 Maverick
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$2,610
Break-even
Model the full break-even

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence10 rows

Agentic

  • BrowseComp

    GPT-5.4 Pro89.3%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • ARC-AGI-2

    GPT-5.4 Pro83.3%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • HLE

    GPT-5.4 Pro58.7%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierScience

    GPT-5.4 Pro36.7%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierScience Research

    GPT-5.4 Pro36.7%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    GPT-5.4 Pro42.7%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • IPhO 2025 (Theory)

    GPT-5.4 Pro93.5%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath (legacy)

    GPT-5.4 Pro50%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Shared source
    GPT-5.4 Pro50.000%
    Llama 4 Maverick0.690%

    GPT-5.4 Pro leads this result

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    GPT-5.4 Pro37.500%
    Source
    Llama 4 Maverick

    Not directly comparable

Questions

Which is better, GPT-5.4 Pro or Llama 4 Maverick?

GPT-5.4 Pro has the higher public score, 72.44 versus 22.91, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 Pro or Llama 4 Maverick?

GPT-5.4 Pro is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 Pro or Llama 4 Maverick?

GPT-5.4 Pro is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, GPT-5.4 Pro or Llama 4 Maverick?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-5.4 Pro or Llama 4 Maverick?

GPT-5.4 Pro has the larger documented context window: 1.05M, compared with 1M.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 22, 2026

Watch GPT-5.4 Pro vs Llama 4 Maverick

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

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.