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.

See the free Radar Brief
Superseded.OpenAI has newer models in this line:GPT-5.5

GPT-5.4

SupersededReleased Mar 5, 2026ProprietaryReasoning1.05M context

Released Mar 5, 2026 see all recent releases

Decision reading
GPT-5.4 scores 73.2 out of 100 and ranks #17 of 230. This profile shows 37 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #16. API pricing is $2.5 input and $15 output per million tokens, with cached input at $0.25.

Data as of September 2, 2026 · How the score is built

Strongest published evidence

Multimodal & Grounded ranks #16. Particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.

Validate before choosing

37 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Coding is its lowest eligible category at #39.

Decision snapshot

Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.

Capability

73.2/100

field median 59.1

#17 of 230 ranked models

Price

$2.50input / $15 output

input median $1

cached $0.25 · blended $8.75

Speed

133tok/s

field median 90 tok/s

First token 126.92 s

Context

1.05Mtokens

field median 256,000

Maximum output length is tracked separately

Capability shape

Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.

GPT-5.4 category percentile values

  • Agentic75th percentile
  • Coding74th percentile
  • ReasoningNot eligible
  • Knowledge64th percentile
  • MathNot eligible
  • MultilingualNot eligible
  • Multimodal57th percentile
  • Instruction followingNot eligible

The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.

Eligible category ranks

  1. Agentic#37/143
  2. Coding#39/148
  3. ReasoningNot ranked
  4. Knowledge#21/57
  5. MathNot ranked
  6. MultilingualNot ranked
  7. Multimodal#16/36
  8. Inst. FollowingNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible

What it costs to get this score

Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.

Explore all models

The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.

Current modelGPT-5.4 · 73.2 score · $8.75 blended per million tokens
405060708090$0.50$1$5$10$25↘ frontierGPT-5.4

Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score

How much of this is verified

Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.

  1. Agentic12/13 verified
  2. Coding3/4 verified
  3. Reasoning2/2 verified
  4. Knowledge3/7 verified
  5. Math2/2 verified
  6. MultilingualNot measured
  7. Multimodal3/9 verified
  8. Inst. FollowingNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured

Spec sheet

Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.

API model ID
gpt-5.4OpenAI pricing
Context window
1.05MOpenAI pricing
Maximum output
Not sourced yet
Knowledge cutoff
Not sourced yet
Input modalities
Not sourced yet
Output modalities
Not sourced yet
Parameters
Not disclosed by the provider
Availability
Not sourced yet
Cloud regions
Not tracked yet
Lifecycle
Superseded
API capabilities
Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
Prompt caching
Published at $0.25 per million cached input tokensOpenAI pricing
Self-host
Weights are not published
Rate limits
Not tracked yet

Category score record

Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.

Category scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticRank #37 of 143Percentile 75thWeight 22%13 benchmarksMixed sources57.1
CodingRank #39 of 148Percentile 74thWeight 20%4 benchmarksMixed sources59.3
ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%2 benchmarksVerified69.8
KnowledgeRank #21 of 57Percentile 64thWeight 12%7 benchmarksMixed sources75.1
MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%2 benchmarksVerified65.7
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measuredNot measured
MultimodalRank #16 of 36Percentile 57thWeight 12%9 benchmarksMixed sources64.8
Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measuredNot measured

Benchmark ledger

Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.

Coding4 rows
Coding benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
SWE-bench ProScore57.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 81.2%

Gap23.5 behindWeightWeighted 10%
LiveCodeBench ProScore87.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 90.8%

Gap3.3 behindWeightDisplay only
React Native EvalsScore85.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Composer 2 · 96.1%

Gap10.8 behindWeightDisplay only
Vibe Code BenchVibe Code Bench v1.1Score67.42%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 4.7 · 71.00%

Gap3.6 behindWeightDisplay only
Agentic13 rows
Agentic benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
Terminal-Bench 2.0Score75.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9%

Gap16.8 behindWeightWeighted 38%
OSWorld-VerifiedScore75%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 86.1%

Gap11.1 behindWeightWeighted 34%
BrowseCompScore82.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.2%

Gap9.5 behindWeightWeighted 28%
CyberGymScore79.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Fugu Cyber · 86.9%

Gap7.9 behindWeightDisplay only
MCP AtlasScore70.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1%

Gap17.5 behindWeightDisplay only
ToolathlonScore54.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 75.6%

Gap21 behindWeightDisplay only
τ²-bench resultsτ²-Bench Tool-Agent-User EvaluationScore98.9%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.4 · 98.9%

GapBest verifiedWeightDisplay only
Claw-EvalScore60.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Ornith-1.5-397B · 81.4%

Gap21.1 behindWeightDisplay only
Benchmark exact
DeepSearchQAScore73.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 95.0%

Gap21.4 behindWeightDisplay only
Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game BenchmarkScore64.89%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97%

Gap8.1 behindWeightDisplay only
Benchmark exact
ResearchClawBenchScore15.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 21.1%

Gap5.8 behindWeightDisplay only
JobBenchScore38.9%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark 1.3 · 64.9%

Gap26 behindWeightDisplay only
Benchmark exact
ExploitGymScore6.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 33.7%

Gap27.7 behindWeightDisplay only
Benchmark exact
Reasoning2 rows
Reasoning benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
ARC-AGI-2Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus for AGI v2Score74.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.5%

Gap18.5 behindWeightWeighted 31%
ARC-AGI-3Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus for AGI v3Score0.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 30.2%

Gap30 behindWeightDisplay only
Knowledge7 rows
Knowledge benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
HLEHumanity's Last ExamScore52.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 65%

Gap12.9 behindWeightWeighted 45%
GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&AScore92.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5%

Gap2.7 behindWeightWeighted 7%
HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without toolsScore39.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 60.9%

Gap21.1 behindWeightDisplay only
GPQA-DGPQA DiamondScore92.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5%

Gap2.7 behindWeightDisplay only
HealthBench HardScore40.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark · 42.8%

Gap2.7 behindWeightDisplay only
MedXpertQA (Text)MedXpertQA TextScore59.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark · 52.6%

Gap7 behindWeightDisplay only
HealthBench ProfessionalScore48.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 60.5%

Gap12.4 behindWeightDisplay only
Math2 rows
Math benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)FrontierMath v2 Tiers 1-3Score47.600%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 89.000%

Gap41.4 behindWeightWeighted 30%
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)FrontierMath v2 Tier 4Score27.100%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 83.000%

Gap55.9 behindWeightWeighted 10%
Multimodal9 rows
Multimodal benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding ProScore81.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.4 Pro · 94%

Gap12.8 behindWeightWeighted 45%
OfficeQA ProScore53.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 66.9%

Gap13.7 behindWeightWeighted 30%
CharXivCharXiv ReasoningScore82.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 93.5%

Gap10.7 behindWeightWeighted 25%
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonMMMU-Pro with PythonScore82.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 84.6%

Gap2.5 behindWeightDisplay only
ERQAScore65.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 77.8%

Gap12.4 behindWeightDisplay only
SimpleVQAScore61.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.7 Plus · 81.7%

Gap20.6 behindWeightDisplay only
ScreenSpot ProScore85.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 87.9%

Gap2.5 behindWeightDisplay only
ZeroBenchScore41.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark · 33.0%

Gap8 behindWeightDisplay only
MedXpertQA (MM)MedXpertQA MultimodalScore77.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 80.4%

Gap3.3 behindWeightDisplay only

Lineage

The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. A successor's displayed score stays at least 0.1 points above its predecessor; raw benchmark rows do not move. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.

  1. Mar 5, 2026 · you are here

    GPT-5.4

    Score 73.2 · $2.5 / $15

  2. Apr 23, 2026

    GPT-5.5

    Score 73.3 · $5 / $30

Base entry

How to read this profile

The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.

GPT-5.4 ranks #17 of 230 on the public leaderboard with a score of 73.17/100. Its source-verified position is #10 of 105.

GPT-5.4 is a proprietary model with a 1.05M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.

ExploitGym is normalized from 54 successful exploits out of 898 tasks in the public paper. HealthBench Professional uses the base GPT-5.4 overall score from the public HealthBench Professional paper, not the ChatGPT for Clinicians harness row.

GPT-5.4 sits in the GPT-5.4 family with GPT-5.4 mini, GPT-5.4 nano, GPT-5.4 Pro. 37 of 416 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.

Its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #16, while its lowest eligible position is Coding at #39. particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.

Radar

GPT-5.4 release history

Full release history

Radar confirmed these at the source. Already tracking GPT-5.4? See the free Radar Brief for what changes next.

Frequently asked questions

How does GPT-5.4 perform overall in AI benchmarks?

GPT-5.4 ranks #17 out of 230 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 73.17/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 37 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.

Is GPT-5.4 good for knowledge and understanding?

GPT-5.4 ranks #21 out of 57 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 75.1/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is GPT-5.4 good for coding and programming?

GPT-5.4 ranks #39 out of 148 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 59.3/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is GPT-5.4 good for mathematics?

GPT-5.4 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is GPT-5.4 good for reasoning and logic?

GPT-5.4 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is GPT-5.4 good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?

GPT-5.4 ranks #37 out of 143 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 57.1/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is GPT-5.4 good for multimodal and grounded tasks?

GPT-5.4 ranks #16 out of 36 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 64.8/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Which sibling models are related to GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4 belongs to the GPT-5.4 family. Related tracked variants include GPT-5.4 mini, GPT-5.4 nano, GPT-5.4 Pro. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.

Does GPT-5.4 have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

No. GPT-5.4 currently has 54 source-displayable rows across 416 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.

What is the context window size of GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4 has a documented context window of 1.05M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.

Compare GPT-5.4 with every tracked model409 comparisons

Last updated September 2, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.

Watch GPT-5.4 in the weekly brief

Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.