UseRightAI
UseRightAI logo
HomeModelsAsk AIComparePricingWhat's New
UseRightAI
Cut through AI hype. Pick what works.
UseRightAI logo
Cut through AI hype. Pick what works.

Independent AI model tracker. Live pricing, real benchmarks, zero vendor bias.

X (Twitter)LinkedInUpdatesContact

Compare

ChatGPT vs ClaudeGPT-4o vs Claude SonnetClaude vs GeminiDeepSeek vs ChatGPTMistral vs ClaudeGemini Flash vs GPT-4o MiniLlama vs ChatGPTAll comparisons →Build your own →

Best For

CodingWritingDevelopersProduct ManagersDesignersSalesBest Cheap AIBest Free AI

Pricing & Data

API Token PricingPrice HistoryBenchmark ScoresPrivacy & SafetySubscription PlansCost CalculatorWhich AI is Cheapest?

Company

About UseRightAIContactWhat ChangedAll ModelsDisclosuresPrivacy PolicyTerms of Service

© 2026 UseRightAI. Independent · Free forever · Not affiliated with any AI provider.

Affiliate links are clearly labeled. See disclosures.

Home/GPT-4o vs GPT-5.4
Winner: GPT-5.4OpenAI model comparison

GPT-4o vs GPT-5.4

GPT-5.4 wins on coding (90 vs 58) and writing quality and price ($2.5 vs $5/1M input) and context window (272K vs 128K). For most workflows, GPT-5.4 is the stronger default — best for agentic automation and desktop control workflows.

Last verified Jun 20, 2026/Model data modified Jun 20, 2026
Rankings refresh dailyScored on 6 criteriaNo paid rankings
OpenAIPremium
Input cost
$0.20/1M
Context
272k tokens
Speed
Balanced

Clear recommendation block

The shortest way to see the safest default, the lower-cost option, and the specialist pick before you read deeper.

Best overall model

GPT-5.4

View
Why this recommendation

GPT-5.4 is the safest overall answer here when you want the strongest default instead of the lowest list price.

OpenAIPremium
Best for
Agentic workflows, desktop automation, and complex multi-step reasoning
Price
$0.20/1M
Context
272k tokens
Best budget model

Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

View
Why this recommendation

Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is the lower-cost option to start with when you still need useful output at scale.

MetaBudget
Best for
High-throughput applications where cost and speed matter more than frontier-level quality, such as chatbots, content classification, and text summarization.
Price
$0.02/1M
Context
16k tokens
Best for speed

GPT-4o

View
Why this recommendation

GPT-4o is the better pick when response speed matters more than maximum reasoning depth.

OpenAIBalanced
Best for
Multimodal tasks and image-adjacent workflows
Price
$0.15/1M
Context
128k tokens

Why this page recommends it

GPT-5.4 leads on coding with a score of 90 vs 58 for GPT-4o.

GPT-5.4 has the larger context window: 272K vs 128K for GPT-4o.

GPT-5.4 is cheaper at $2.5/1M input tokens vs $5/1M for GPT-4o.

Decision notes

Choose GPT-5.4 for coding and research — agentic workflows.

Choose GPT-4o when multimodal tasks and image-adjacent workflows.

Both models serve different primary workflows — consider using each where it has a clear edge.

Interactive decision lab

Test the recommendation against your priority

Switch the scoring lens to see whether the top answer changes when you care more about cost, speed, or long-document work.

#1GPT-5.481 pts
#2GPT-4o62 pts
Quality first

GPT-5.4

OpenAI / Premium / May 29, 2026

81

Best for agentic automation and desktop control workflows.

Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.

Cost
$0.20/1M
$15.00/1M out
Speed
Balanced
3/100 score
Context
272k tokens
input window
View model
Data-backed recommendation
Avoid this pick if

You need the highest current coding benchmark scores — Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.5 are newer premium picks.

Recommended comparisons

The fastest way to see where the recommendation shifts when your priority changes.

OpenAIBalancedWinner: GPT-5.4

GPT-4o

Best all-around pick for image-heavy and multimodal workflows.

Best use case
Multimodal tasks and image-adjacent workflows
Input
$0.15/1M
Pricing
Balanced
Speed
Fast
Context
128k tokens
ImagesMultimodalCreative
OpenAIPremiumOption 2

GPT-5.4

Best for agentic automation and desktop control workflows.

Best use case
Agentic workflows, desktop automation, and complex multi-step reasoning
Input
$0.20/1M
Pricing
Premium
Speed
Balanced
Context
272k tokens
AgenticDesktop controlReasoning

Pros

Only frontier model that can control a desktop via API (click, type, navigate)

Strong at multi-step agentic tasks and autonomous workflows

Competitive coding performance with 74.9% SWE-bench score

Cons

Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.5 now outperform it on current premium coding benchmarks

Smaller context window (272K) vs Gemini 3.1 Pro (2M) for research

Explore related decisions

Browse all modelsCompare pricingView GPT-4oView GPT-5.4GPT 4OGPT 5 4Best AI for codingBest AI for writingBest AI for researchCompare models side by side

How we evaluate AI models

UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.

Newsletter

Get updates when gpt-4o vs gpt-5.4 changes

Useful if you care about ranking shifts, pricing changes, or a better recommendation appearing in this decision path.

No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.

FAQ

Is GPT-4o better than GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4 wins on more categories — coding, research, reasoning. GPT-4o is the better pick when multimodal tasks and image-adjacent workflows. The right choice depends on your specific use case.

Which is cheaper — GPT-4o or GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4 is cheaper at $2.5/1M input and $15/1M output. GPT-4o costs $5/1M input and $15/1M output.

Which has a larger context window — GPT-4o or GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4 has the larger context window at 272K tokens vs GPT-4o's 128K. For large document analysis, GPT-5.4 is the stronger pick.

Is GPT-4o or GPT-5.4 better for coding?

GPT-5.4 is better for coding with a score of 90 vs GPT-4o's 58. For the highest coding quality available, Claude Sonnet 4.6 (79.6% SWE-bench) or Opus 4.6 (80.8%) remain benchmarks.

Which is faster — GPT-4o or GPT-5.4?

GPT-4o is faster with a fast speed rating (score: 4) vs GPT-5.4's balanced rating (score: 3).