Compare AI models
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins · base tier | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $0.20 | $1.25 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $1.25 | $2.50 |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | $0.02 | $0.20 |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.10OpenAI | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $0.625OpenAI | — |
| $103OpenAI list price | $375SpaceXSI list price | |
| Benchmarks | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 14% | 56% |
ARC-AGI-2Abstract reasoning — Puzzle-style tests of abstract reasoning and pattern-finding — the kind of thing people find easy but AIs often struggle with. Higher is better. | 5.7% | 53.3% |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | — | 76.7% |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 37.7% | — |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 39% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | OpenAI | SpaceXSI |
| Release date | Mar 17 2026 | Feb 17 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
GPT-5.4 nanovsClaude Haiku 5.5Grok 4.20 BetavsClaude Haiku 5.5GPT-5.4 nanovsGemini 4 ArgonGrok 4.20 BetavsGemini 4 ArgonGPT-5.4 nanovsMuse WonderGrok 4.20 BetavsMuse WonderGPT-5.4 nanovsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGrok 4.20 BetavsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGPT-5.4 nanovsMistral Large 4Grok 4.20 BetavsMistral Large 4GPT-5.4 nanovsKimi K3Grok 4.20 BetavsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
Grok 4.20 Beta leads GPT-5.4 nano on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (BullshitBench v2, ARC-AGI-2). GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper on both input and output: $0.20 vs $1.25 per million input tokens, and $1.25 vs $2.50 per million output tokens. Figures are base-tier rates. Grok 4.20 Beta shipped 28 days before GPT-5.4 nano, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On BullshitBench v2, Grok 4.20 Beta leads at 56% vs GPT-5.4 nano at 14%. On ARC-AGI-2, Grok 4.20 Beta leads at 53.3% vs GPT-5.4 nano at 5.7%.