GPT-5.4 vs Grok 4 for Coding
Winner: GPT-5.4. On the authoritative external measure for coding (SWE-bench Verified, Epoch AI), GPT-5.4 scores 76.9 while Grok 4 has no SWE-bench entry in our payload. Because the external benchmark is the primary signal for Coding, GPT-5.4 is the definitive pick. Our internal proxies support that result: GPT-5.4 scores 5/5 on structured output, 5/5 on agentic planning, 5/5 on safety calibration and long context, and 4/5 on tool calling; Grok 4 scores 4/5 structured output, 3/5 agentic planning, 2/5 safety calibration, and 4/5 tool calling. TaskScore in our suite: GPT-5.4 = 76.9, Grok 4 = 0 (no task score).
openai
GPT-5.4
Benchmark Scores
External Benchmarks
Pricing
Input
$2.50/MTok
Output
$15.00/MTok
modelpicker.net
xai
Grok 4
Benchmark Scores
External Benchmarks
Pricing
Input
$3.00/MTok
Output
$15.00/MTok
modelpicker.net
Task Analysis
What Coding demands: accurate structured output (adhering to schemas and runnable code), reliable tool calling (function selection and arguments for compilers/linters/formatters), long-context handling (large repositories and multi-file prompts), strategic planning (decomposing bugs and refactors), and safety (avoid producing insecure or harmful code). Primary signal: SWE-bench Verified (Epoch AI) is the authoritative external benchmark for coding; GPT-5.4 scores 76.9 on SWE-bench Verified in our data while Grok 4 has no SWE-bench score in the payload, so the external benchmark favors GPT-5.4. Supporting evidence from our internal tests: GPT-5.4 achieves top marks (5/5) in structured output, agentic planning, long context, faithfulness and safety calibration—these traits explain strong SWE-bench performance. Grok 4 matches GPT-5.4 on long context (5/5) and faithfulness (5/5) but lags on planning (3/5) and safety (2/5) and is one point lower on structured output (4/5 vs 5/5). Tool calling is tied (4/5 each), so both can sequence and call tools; differences are in planning, schema fidelity, and safety handling.
Practical Examples
When GPT-5.4 shines: 1) Generating a multi-file codebase with strict JSON schemas—GPT-5.4 scored 5/5 structured output and handles 1,050,000-token contexts (922K input + 128K output), so it can produce consistent, schema-compliant files across large repos. 2) Complex bug triage and automated patching—GPT-5.4's 5/5 agentic planning and 5/5 strategic analysis mean better decomposition and recovery steps. 3) Producing secure code for sensitive domains—5/5 safety calibration reduces unsafe suggestions. When Grok 4 shines: 1) Classification and routing tasks—Grok 4 scores 4/5 classification vs GPT-5.4's 3/5, so Grok 4 is stronger for labeling, triage, and issue routing. 2) Faithful single-file fixes where long context isn't required—Grok 4 matches GPT-5.4 on faithfulness (5/5) and long context (5/5). Cost and engineering tradeoffs: GPT-5.4 input/output cost per mT: 2.5/15; Grok 4: 3/15. Context window: GPT-5.4 = 1,050,000 tokens; Grok 4 = 256,000 tokens—choose GPT-5.4 for extremely large repository reasoning, Grok 4 for smaller-repo workflows where classification priority matters.
Bottom Line
For Coding, choose GPT-5.4 if you need authoritative external-benchmark performance (SWE-bench Verified 76.9), best-in-class structured output (5/5), deep planning (5/5), large-context support (1,050,000 tokens), and stronger safety (5/5). Choose Grok 4 if you prioritize classification/routing (4/5 classification), slightly different pricing or toolchains, or you work primarily within smaller long-contexts where Grok 4's 256k window and 4/5 structured output are sufficient—but note Grok 4 has no SWE-bench Verified score in our data.
How We Test
We test every model against our 12-benchmark suite covering tool calling, agentic planning, creative problem solving, safety calibration, and more. Each test is scored 1–5 by an LLM judge. Read our full methodology.
For coding tasks, we supplement our benchmark suite with SWE-bench scores from Epoch AI, an independent research organization.