Roboflow

GPT-5.4 Mini vs Grok 4.5

Compare GPT-5.4 Mini and Grok 4.5 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Object Detection, Classification, Image Captioning, and OCR.

Compare GPT-5.4 Mini vs Grok 4.5 live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
OpenAIGPT-5.4 Mini
Run to compare this model.
GrokGrok 4.5
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

GPT-5.4 Mini vs Grok 4.5 on Vision Evals

Grok 4.5 scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Counting, where GPT-5.4 Mini leads 58.6% to 55.4%.

Overall, GPT-5.4 Mini averages 64.7% (#38 of 53) against 65.0% (#37 of 53) for Grok 4.5.

GPT-5.4 Mini is both cheaper ($0.0030 vs $0.0077 per sample) and faster (5.3s vs 14.3s per sample).

GPT-5.4 MiniGrok 4.5

GPT-5.4 Mini vs Grok 4.5 Comparison Table

Evals updated September 5, 2026Pricing updated September 13, 2026

PropertyGPT-5.4 MiniGrok 4.5
OrganizationOpenAISpaceXAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMar 2026Jul 2026
Context Window400K500K
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.750$2.00
Output $/1M$4.50$6.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
64.7%
65.0%
Avg cost / sample$0.0030$0.0077
Avg speed / sample5.25s14.31s
By task
Object Detection (low)
15.8%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 15.3 to 16.1
$0.0044
18.0%
$0.0100
Object Detection (high)
16.6%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 15.8 to 17.4
$0.030
Counting (low)
58.6%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 56.8 to 60.8
$0.0019
55.4%
$0.0065
Counting (high)
64.9%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.5 to 67.6
$0.0073
Identification (low)
83.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0.0013
81.3%
$0.0045
Identification (high)
82.3%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 84.4
$0.0055
OCR (low)
89.5%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.1 to 90.6
$0.0042
92.5%
$0.0065
OCR (high)
89.0%
±1.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.7 to 91.2
$0.030
Data Extraction (low)
84.2%
±2.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.5 to 86.6
$0.0014
84.5%
$0.0044
Data Extraction (high)
82.1%
±2.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 84.5
$0.0036
Reasoning (low)
57.0%
±3.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 60.9
$0.0022
58.3%
$0.0076
Reasoning (high)
64.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.9 to 65.6
$0.0096
59.6%
$0.011

GPT-5.4 Mini vs Grok 4.5: Overview

GPT-5.4 Mini

GPT-5.4 mini is a fast, cost-efficient model developed by OpenAI and released on March 17, 2026, optimized for high-throughput workloads and subagent orchestration. It supports text and image inputs within a 400,000-token context window, making it ideal for processing extensive visual datasets and large codebases in a single request. Designed for low-latency production environments, the model integrates with key API features including function calling, web search, and tool-based computer use, allowing it to assist in automated workflows that require navigating digital interfaces.

Compared to the previous GPT-5 mini, this version runs more than twice as fast while approaching the performance levels of the flagship GPT-5.4 on reasoning and coding benchmarks. While the larger GPT-5.4 introduces native, state-of-the-art computer-use capabilities, GPT-5.4 mini provides a scalable alternative for interpreting screenshots and reasoning over dense UI layouts. For vision tasks on Playground, it excels at extracting structured information from visual documents and assisting in agentic tasks that involve real-time interpretation of software interfaces alongside text.

Grok 4.5

Grok 4.5 is a proprietary reasoning model from SpaceXAI (xAI) that accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window. xAI positions it as a model for coding, agentic software work, and knowledge tasks, and states it was trained in the company's Memphis data centers on datasets spanning science, engineering, and mathematics. Its reinforcement learning stage covers hundreds of thousands of multi step software engineering tasks scored by automated checks and model based grading, and training is reported to have run on tens of thousands of NVIDIA GB300 GPUs using an asynchronous scheme in which multi hour agentic rollouts continue while learning proceeds in parallel, targeting long horizon autonomous operation rather than single turn inference.

For vision, the model consumes JPEG and PNG images in any order relative to text prompts, covering visual question answering, description of chart and document imagery, and reading text rendered inside a scene. Reasoning effort is configurable, and the model supports function calling and structured outputs, so image inputs can be interleaved with tool calls inside agent loops. xAI has not published a technical report, architecture details, or parameter count, and reported mixture of experts sizing figures come from secondary coverage rather than official documentation.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Grok 4.5 performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 65.0% (#37 of 53) against 64.7% (#38 of 53) for GPT-5.4 Mini. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Counting benchmark at low effort, GPT-5.4 Mini leads with 58.6% against 55.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

GPT-5.4 Mini is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0030 per sample against $0.0077. GPT-5.4 Mini is priced at $0.75 per 1M input tokens and $4.50 per 1M output; Grok 4.5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $6.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GPT-5.4 Mini is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 5.3s per inference against 14.3s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for open prompts and object detection in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.