GPT-4o-mini vs GPT-5.4 Mini

Summary of our 12-test comparison (scores are from our testing): - Structured output: GPT-5.4 Mini 5 vs GPT-4o-mini 4. GPT-5.4 Mini ties for 1st (tied with 24 others out of 54); GPT-4o-mini ranks 26 of 54. Meaning: GPT-5.4 Mini is more reliable for strict JSON/schema adherence. - Strategic analysis: GPT-5.4 Mini 5 vs GPT-4o-mini 2. GPT-5.4 Mini is tied for 1st (1/54 group); GPT-4o-mini ranks 44 of 54. This affects nuanced tradeoff reasoning and numeric planning. - Constrained rewriting: GPT-5.4 Mini 4 vs GPT-4o-mini 3. GPT-5.4 Mini ranks 6 of 53 vs GPT-4o-mini 31 — better at tight-length rewrites. - Creative problem solving: GPT-5.4 Mini 4 vs GPT-4o-mini 2. GPT-5.4 Mini ranks 9 of 54; GPT-4o-mini ranks 47 — more idea-generation capability in our tests. - Faithfulness: GPT-5.4 Mini 5 vs GPT-4o-mini 3. GPT-5.4 Mini ties for 1st (1/55 group); GPT-4o-mini ranks 52 of 55 — fewer hallucinations and better source adherence in our testing. - Long context: GPT-5.4 Mini 5 vs GPT-4o-mini 4. GPT-5.4 Mini ties for 1st (with 36 others); GPT-4o-mini ranks 38 of 55 — better retrieval/accuracy past 30K tokens. - Persona consistency: GPT-5.4 Mini 5 vs GPT-4o-mini 4. GPT-5.4 Mini ties for 1st; GPT-4o-mini rank 38 — stronger role stability. - Agentic planning: GPT-5.4 Mini 4 vs GPT-4o-mini 3. GPT-5.4 Mini rank 16 of 54 vs GPT-4o-mini 42 — better goal decomposition and recovery. - Multilingual: GPT-5.4 Mini 5 vs GPT-4o-mini 4. GPT-5.4 Mini ties for 1st; GPT-4o-mini rank 36 — higher non-English parity. - Tool calling: tie (both 4). Both models rank 18 of 54 (many models share this score) — function selection and sequencing comparable in our tests. - Classification: tie (both 4). Both tied for 1st (with many models) — routing and categorization are similar. - Safety calibration: GPT-4o-mini 4 vs GPT-5.4 Mini 2. GPT-4o-mini ranks 6 of 55 vs GPT-5.4 Mini rank 12 — GPT-4o-mini is better at refusing harmful requests and permitting legitimate ones in our testing. External math benchmarks: GPT-4o-mini scores 52.6% on MATH Level 5 and 6.9% on AIME 2025 (Epoch AI); GPT-5.4 Mini has no MATH/AIME scores in the payload. Overall: GPT-5.4 Mini wins 9 tests, GPT-4o-mini wins 1 (safety calibration), and 2 are ties (tool calling, classification).

Per-mTok prices: GPT-4o-mini input $0.15, output $0.60; GPT-5.4 Mini input $0.75, output $4.50. Assuming a 50/50 split of input/output tokens: - 1M tokens/month (500 mTok input + 500 mTok output): GPT-4o-mini = $375 (500*$0.15 + 500*$0.60); GPT-5.4 Mini = $2,625 (500*$0.75 + 500*$4.50). - 10M tokens/month: GPT-4o-mini = $3,750; GPT-5.4 Mini = $26,250. - 100M tokens/month: GPT-4o-mini = $37,500; GPT-5.4 Mini = $262,500. The absolute gap grows linearly: at 100M tokens the monthly difference is $225,000. Teams running high-throughput services, large-scale chatbots, or cost-sensitive consumer apps should prefer GPT-4o-mini for budget reasons; organizations prioritizing maximal reasoning, fidelity, and long-context behavior may accept GPT-5.4 Mini’s higher bill for quality gains.

Choose GPT-4o-mini if: - You need a low-cost production model for high-throughput or consumer-facing apps (input $0.15/mtok, output $0.60/mtok). - Safety calibration is a priority (GPT-4o-mini scores 4 vs 2). - You still need multimodal input (both models accept text+image+file→text). Choose GPT-5.4 Mini if: - You need best-in-class structured output, long-context retrieval, faithfulness, strategic reasoning, multilingual parity or persona consistency (GPT-5.4 Mini wins these tests, often ranking 1st/tied). - You will tolerate significantly higher compute spend for improved reasoning and format fidelity.