GPT-5.4 Nano vs Step 3.7 Flash
| Signal | GPT-5.4 Nano | Delta | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | +17 | |
Benchmarks | 90 | +90 | |
Pricing | 99 | 0 | |
Context window size | 80 | +3 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 85 | -5 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
Score History
78.8
current score
GPT-5.4 Nano
right now
40
current score
GPT-5.4 Nano
OpenAI
Step 3.7 Flash
StepFun
Step 3.7 Flash saves you $5.00/month
That's $60.00/year compared to GPT-5.4 Nano at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 Nano | Step 3.7 Flash | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 79 | 40 | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Rank | #58 | #188 | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Quality Rank | #58 | #188 | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Adoption Rank | #58 | #188 | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 400K | 256K | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Pricing | $0.20/$1.25/M | $0.20/$1.15/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 83 | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Benchmarks | 90 | -- | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Pricing | 99 | 99 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Context window size | 80 | 77 | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Output Capacity | 85 | 90 | Step 3.7 Flash |
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 79/100 (rank #58), placing it in the top 80% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #188), placing it in the top 36% of all 290 models tracked.
GPT-5.4 Nano has a 39-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Choose GPT-5.4 Nano when you need:
- Processing long documents or large codebases (400K token context)
- Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
Choose Step 3.7 Flash when you need:
- Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
- Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
GPT-5.4 Nano offers 7% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $20.25/month with Step 3.7 Flash vs $21.75/month with GPT-5.4 Nano - a $1.50 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. Step 3.7 Flash also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (400K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($1.15/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (79/100) 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 Nano clearly outperforms Step 3.7 Flash with a significant 38.8-point lead. For most general use cases, GPT-5.4 Nano is the stronger choice. However, Step 3.7 Flash may still excel in niche scenarios.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
GPT-5.4 Nano
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Step 3.7 Flash
7% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
GPT-5.4 Nano
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
GPT-5.4 Nano
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
GPT-5.4 Nano
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
- Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
- Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
- Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
- Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
| Capability | GPT-5.4 Nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
GPT-5.4 Nano
OpenAI
Step 3.7 Flash
StepFun
Step 3.7 Flash saves you $0.1200/month
That's 6% cheaper than GPT-5.4 Nano 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 Nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 400K | 256K |
| Max Output Tokens | 128,000 | 256,000 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Mar 17, 2026 | May 28, 2026 |