Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
GPT-5.3-Codex vs GPT-5.4
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GPT-5.4 wins on 6/7 benchmarks
GPT-5.4 wins 6 of 7 shared benchmarks. Leads in speed · agentic · knowledge.
Category leads
speed·GPT-5.4agentic·GPT-5.4knowledge·GPT-5.4coding·GPT-5.4
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
GPT-5.3-Codex
#86 by perf·no signal
GPT-5.4
#46 by perf·no signal
Best value
GPT-5.4
1.0x better value than GPT-5.3-Codex
GPT-5.3-Codex
6.6 pts/$
$7.88/M
GPT-5.4
6.7 pts/$
$8.75/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
7 benchmarks · 2 models
GPT-5.3-CodexGPT-5.4
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
GPT-5.4 leads by +7.2
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
GPT-5.3-Codex
62.2
GPT-5.4
69.4
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
GPT-5.4 leads by +4.1
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
GPT-5.3-Codex
53.1
GPT-5.4
57.3
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
GPT-5.4 leads by +3.2
GPT-5.3-Codex
54.0
GPT-5.4
57.2
APEX-Agents
GPT-5.4 leads by +4.2
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
GPT-5.3-Codex
31.7
GPT-5.4
35.9
PostTrainBench
GPT-5.4 leads by +2.5
GPT-5.3-Codex
17.8
GPT-5.4
20.2
SWE-Bench verified
GPT-5.4 leads by +2.1
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
GPT-5.3-Codex
74.8
GPT-5.4
76.9
WeirdML
GPT-5.3-Codex leads by +21.9
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
GPT-5.3-Codex
79.3
GPT-5.4
57.4
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3-Codex | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?" | 62.2 | 69.4 |
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads. | 53.1 | 57.3 |
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index | 54.0 | 57.2 |
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 31.7 | 35.9 |
PostTrainBench | 17.8 | 20.2 |
SWE-Bench verified SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability. | 74.8 | 76.9 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 79.3 | 57.4 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $1.75 | $14.00 | 400K tokens (~200 books) | $48.13 | |
| $2.50 | $15.00 | 1.1M tokens (~525 books) | $56.25 |