Model comparison
GPT-5.4 mini vs Grok 4.6
Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 mini costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 38 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 38 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 mini scores higher in 1 category and Grok 4.6 in 9 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.4 to 30.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 18.9% for GPT-5.4 mini and 67.1% for Grok 4.6.
- GPT-5.4 mini is cheaper at $0.75 / $4.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.6.
- Grok 4.6 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 400K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 45.0 | 56.9 |
| Released | 2026-03-17 | 2026-08-12 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 500K |
| Max output | 128K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.75 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.50 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 46 | 49 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 45.2 (#72), Grok 4.6: 58.5 (#16)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 27% | 48% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1397 | 1617 |
| SciCode | 49.9% | 56.5% |
| WeirdML | 60.3% | 67.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1438 | 1465 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,189 | 1,508 |
| DeepSWE | — | 67.5% |
| CursorBench | — | 41.4% |
| FrontierSWE | — | 25.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 29.9 (#81), Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#27)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 65.3% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 36.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 17.2% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 9,047 |
Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 30.4 (#85), Grok 4.6: 61.4 (#20)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 18.9% | 67.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 61.8% | 80% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 63.7% | 87.5% |
| CritPt | 10% | 19.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 24% | 40% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1424 | 1447 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 11% | 34% |
| DTBench | 80% | 97.3% |
| LMCA | 40.8% | 48.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 148.84 | 156.44 |
| SimpleBench | — | 75.9% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.9% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 61.7% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 30.5% |
| ForecastBench | 57 | — |
Math Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 45.5 (#75), Grok 4.6: 67.0 (#24)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 51.2% | 66% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 9.8% | 31.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 88.9% | 99.2% |
| ProofBench | 21% | 51% |
| LMArena Math | 1419 | 1423 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 28.3% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 51.5 (#67), Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#20)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 86.9% | 94% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 29.4% | 49.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1435 | 1467 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.5% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 39.7 (#56), Grok 4.6: 43.6 (#23)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1245 | 1263 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 33.2% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 40% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1452 |
Multilingual Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 51.9 (#96), Grok 4.6: 53.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1420 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1446 | 1480 |
| LMArena French | 1440 | 1461 |
| LMArena German | 1409 | 1431 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1374 | 1376 |
| LMArena Korean | 1368 | 1397 |
| LMArena Russian | 1417 | 1422 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1405 | 1404 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 74.1 (#102), Grok 4.6: 75.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1431 |
Long Context Grok 4.6 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 43.0 (#112), Grok 4.6: 44.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1407 | 1454 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.4 mini leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 64.0 (#58), Grok 4.6: 62.3 (#80)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1412 | 1428 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1370 | 1428 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1429 | 1425 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1665 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 mini better than Grok 4.6?
Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 mini costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 mini or Grok 4.6?
GPT-5.4 mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.75 per million input tokens and $4.50 per million output tokens; Grok 4.6 lists at $2 and $6.
Is GPT-5.4 mini or Grok 4.6 better for coding?
Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.5 versus 45.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.6 does, with 500K tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 mini and Grok 4.6 share?
38 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 mini has 46 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.6 has 49.