| Signal | GPT-5.4 | Delta | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 90 | +15 | |
Pricing | 85 | -14 | |
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
right now
78
current score
OpenAI
xAI
Grok 4.1 Fast saves you $955.00/month
That's $11460.00/year compared to GPT-5.4 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 | Grok 4.1 Fast | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 92 | 78 | GPT-5.4 |
| Rank | #2 | #52 | GPT-5.4 |
| Quality Rank | #2 | #52 | GPT-5.4 |
| Adoption Rank | #2 | #52 | GPT-5.4 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1050K | 2000K | Grok 4.1 Fast |
| Pricing | $2.50/$15.00/M | $0.20/$0.50/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 100 | GPT-5.4 |
| Benchmarks | 90 | 76 | GPT-5.4 |
| Pricing | 85 | 100 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
| Context window size | 96 | 100 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | GPT-5.4 |
| Output Capacity | 85 | 75 | GPT-5.4 |
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 #2), 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 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 96% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $10.50/month with Grok 4.1 Fast vs $262.50/month with GPT-5.4 - a $252.00 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 clearly outperforms Grok 4.1 Fast with a significant 13.900000000000006-point lead. For most general use cases, GPT-5.4 is the stronger choice. However, Grok 4.1 Fast may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
GPT-5.4
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Grok 4.1 Fast
96% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
GPT-5.4
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
GPT-5.4
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
GPT-5.4
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
| Capability | GPT-5.4 | 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 $21.54/month
That's 96% cheaper than GPT-5.4 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 | 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 achieves its #1 ranking through a combination of superior performance (8-point lead) and aggressive pricing at $0.20/M input and $0.50/M output, making it 30x cheaper than GPT-5.4's $15/M output tokens. The 2.0M context window (1.9x larger) likely contributes to better code comprehension for large codebases, though GPT-5.4's 128K max output dwarfs Grok's 30K limit for generating extensive documentation or refactoring tasks.
Monthly costs would plummet from $316,000 (80M × $2.5/1M + 20M × $15/1M) to just $26,000 (80M × $0.20/1M + 20M × $0.50/1M), saving $290,000 or 92% while gaining 8 performance points. This massive cost differential makes GPT-5.4 viable only for use cases requiring its 4.3x larger output capacity (128K vs 30K tokens) for tasks like full codebase generation or extensive documentation.
Despite matching feature sets, Grok's superior 75/100 score likely stems from its 2.0M token context window providing better long-range code understanding compared to GPT-5.4's 1.1M limit. The performance gap persists even though GPT-5.4 offers 4.3x more output tokens (128K vs 30K), suggesting that for coding benchmarks, context comprehension matters more than generation length.
Migration makes financial sense for most teams given the 30x output cost reduction ($15/M vs $0.50/M) and 8-point performance advantage, but GPT-5.4's 128K max output remains crucial for generating entire applications or extensive refactoring in single calls. Teams should evaluate whether their workflows genuinely need outputs beyond Grok's 30K limit before switching, as the $14.50/M output savings could fund multiple sequential Grok calls where needed.
While Grok 4.1 Fast leads with 75/100 performance at 30x lower output costs, OpenAI's mature ecosystem and GPT-5.4's 128K output tokens provide stability advantages for enterprise deployments requiring extensive code generation. The 1.9x context window advantage (2.0M vs 1.1M) positions Grok for analyzing large codebases, but teams invested in OpenAI's tooling face switching costs that may offset the $14.50/M output token savings.