| Signal | GPT-5.4 Pro | Delta | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 90 | +15 | |
Pricing | 5 | -94 | |
Context window size | 96 | -4 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 85 | +11 | |
| Overall Result | 2 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
Score History
91.9
current score
GPT-5.4 Pro
right now
78
current score
OpenAI
xAI
Grok 4.1 Fast saves you $11955.00/month
That's $143460.00/year compared to GPT-5.4 Pro at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 92 | 78 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Rank | #1 | #52 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Quality Rank | #1 | #52 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Adoption Rank | #1 | #52 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1050K | 2000K | Grok 4.1 Fast |
| Pricing | $30.00/$180.00/M | $0.20/$0.50/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 100 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Benchmarks | 90 | 76 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Pricing | 5 | 100 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
| Context window size | 96 | 100 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Output Capacity | 85 | 75 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 92/100 (rank #1), placing it in the top 100% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 78/100 (rank #52), placing it in the top 82% of all 290 models tracked.
GPT-5.4 Pro has a 14-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably better performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Grok 4.1 Fast offers 100% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $10.50/month with Grok 4.1 Fast vs $3150.00/month with GPT-5.4 Pro - a $3139.50 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Grok 4.1 Fast also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (2000K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.50/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (92/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
GPT-5.4 Pro clearly outperforms Grok 4.1 Fast with a significant 13.900000000000006-point lead. For most general use cases, GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger choice. However, Grok 4.1 Fast may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
GPT-5.4 Pro
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Grok 4.1 Fast
100% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
GPT-5.4 Pro
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
GPT-5.4 Pro
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
GPT-5.4 Pro
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
| Capability | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
xAI
Grok 4.1 Fast saves you $269.04/month
That's 100% cheaper than GPT-5.4 Pro at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | GPT-5.4 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1.1M | 2M |
| Max Output Tokens | 128,000 | 30,000 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Mar 5, 2026 | Nov 19, 2025 |
Grok 4.1 Fast's architecture appears optimized specifically for code generation tasks, achieving the #1 rank among 326 coding models while maintaining extremely aggressive pricing at $0.50/M output tokens versus GPT-5.4 Pro's $180/M. The 14-point score gap (75 vs 61) suggests xAI made deliberate tradeoffs focusing on coding performance over general-purpose capabilities, though both models share identical feature sets including vision and function calling.
At 80M output tokens monthly, Grok 4.1 Fast costs $40 while GPT-5.4 Pro would cost $14,400 - a staggering $14,360 monthly difference. Even accounting for GPT-5.4 Pro's superior 128K max output window versus Grok's 30K, the 360x price multiplier makes GPT-5.4 Pro economically unviable for high-volume coding applications where Grok holds the performance crown anyway.
GPT-5.4 Pro's 128K max output tokens dwarfs Grok's 30K limit by 4.3x, making it essential for generating large codebases, comprehensive documentation, or multi-file refactoring tasks in single requests. Teams requiring OpenAI's mature ecosystem integration and proven enterprise support might accept the $180/M output cost despite Grok's superior benchmark performance and nearly double context capacity.
The gap from #1 (Grok) to #11 (GPT-5.4 Pro) represents a 23% performance delta (75 vs 61 score), which translates to measurably better code completion accuracy, bug detection, and architectural suggestions in benchmarks. However, both models share identical capabilities including reasoning and web search, suggesting the performance gap stems from model architecture and training data rather than feature limitations.
Despite identical capability sets, teams would need to rewrite API integrations for xAI's endpoints and adjust for the 4.3x reduction in max output tokens (128K to 30K), potentially requiring request chunking for large code generation tasks. The $30/M to $0.20/M input pricing drop and 14-point performance gain likely justify migration effort for teams processing over 10M tokens monthly, where cost savings exceed engineering time investment.