Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 400k | 256k |
| 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 | $1.00 |
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 | $2.00 |
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 | $300SpaceXSI list price | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
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% | — |
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. | — | 70.8% |
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% | — |
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% | — |
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 | Aug 28 2025 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
GPT-5.4 nanovsClaude Haiku 5.5Grok Code Fast 1vsClaude Haiku 5.5GPT-5.4 nanovsGemini 4 ArgonGrok Code Fast 1vsGemini 4 ArgonGPT-5.4 nanovsMuse Spark OpenGrok Code Fast 1vsMuse Spark OpenGPT-5.4 nanovsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Grok Code Fast 1vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017GPT-5.4 nanovsMistral Large 4Grok Code Fast 1vsMistral Large 4GPT-5.4 nanovsKimi K3Grok Code Fast 1vsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
GPT-5.4 nano and Grok Code Fast 1 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper on both input and output: $0.20 vs $1.00 per million input tokens, and $1.25 vs $2.00 per million output tokens. Figures are base-tier rates. Grok Code Fast 1 shipped 201 days before GPT-5.4 nano, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 400k (GPT-5.4 nano) vs 256k (Grok Code Fast 1).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — GPT-5.4 nano and Grok Code Fast 1 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.