GPT-5.4 vs Llama 4 Maverick
Compare GPT-5.4 and Llama 4 Maverick side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in OCR, Image Captioning, and Open Prompt.
Compare GPT-5.4 vs Llama 4 Maverick live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
GPT-5.4 vs Llama 4 Maverick: Overview
GPT-5.4 is a proprietary multimodal large language model developed by OpenAI and released on March 5, 2026. It is designed for professional workloads such as advanced software development, research, and agentic automation. The model combines the general reasoning capabilities of the GPT-5 series with software engineering improvements derived from GPT-5.3-Codex. In the API and Codex environments it supports context windows of up to 1 million tokens, enabling long-context reasoning and large-scale code or document workflows.
Compared with GPT-5.2, GPT-5.4 reduces false individual claims by 33% and lowers overall response errors by 18%, improving factual reliability across complex tasks. It is also the first general-purpose OpenAI release with native computer-use capabilities, allowing agents to interact with desktops, browsers, and external applications to complete multi-step workflows. The model family includes three variants: GPT-5.4 (standard), GPT-5.4 Pro for higher-performance workloads, and GPT-5.4 Thinking, a reasoning-oriented version in ChatGPT that presents an upfront plan before generating its response. The API also introduces a Tool Search system that allows models to retrieve tool definitions dynamically, reducing token usage in tool-heavy integrations.
Llama 4 Maverick, introduced on April 5, 2025, is one of the first models in Meta’s Llama 4 family, designed as a natively multimodal model supporting text + image inputs with text outputs. It employs a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture with 128 experts, activating ~17B parameters per token out of a pool of ~400B total parameters. This design improves scalability, efficiency, and reasoning capacity. Maverick has a 1M-token context window, enabling it to handle large documents, extended conversations, and multimodal reasoning. Its knowledge cutoff is August 2024.
The model is released under the Llama 4 Community License and comes in both base and instruction-tuned (“Instruct”) versions. Maverick is widely deployed via Hugging Face, Google Vertex AI, Amazon Bedrock, and Oracle Cloud, making it one of the most accessible large open-weight models. However, it outputs text only (no image/audio generation) and, while input capacity is huge, output limits are typically much smaller. The MoE design also raises hardware demands, as maintaining 128 experts requires significant compute resources, and Meta’s license introduces restrictions around commercial-scale use.
GPT-5.4 vs Llama 4 Maverick Comparison Table
| Property | GPT-5.4 | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | Meta |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2026 | Apr 2025 |
| Context Window | 1.1M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | 400B | |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.50 | $0.150 |
| Output $/1M | $15.00 | $0.600 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Overall Score | 77.61% | |
| Avg Response Time | 7.16s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.4K | |
| Median output tokens | 108 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0052 | |
| Defect Detection | 86.7%(13/15) | |
| Document Understanding | 88.9%(8/9) | |
| Object Counting | 40%(4/10) | |
| Object Understanding | 85.7%(12/14) | |
| Spatial Understanding | 78.9%(15/19) | |
Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology