GPT 5.4 vs Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta pricing
Side-by-side token pricing for GPT 5.4 (OpenAI) and Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta (xAI), plus the total cost at three workload sizes so the crossover point is obvious. Prices refreshed 2026-09-23 00:10 UTC.
| Metric | GPT 5.4 | Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta |
|---|---|---|
| Input $/1M tokens | $2.5 | $1.25 |
| Output $/1M tokens | $15 | $2.5 |
| Cached input $/1M | $0.25 | $0.2 |
| Context window | 1.1M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 1M |
| Vision | yes | yes |
| Tool calling | yes | no |
| Cache pricing | yes | yes |
Total cost by workload
| Workload | GPT 5.4 | Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta | Cheaper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1M tokens in · 300K out | $7 | $2 | Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta (71% less) |
| 10M tokens in · 3M out | $70 | $20 | Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta (71% less) |
| 100M tokens in · 30M out | $700 | $200 | Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta (71% less) |
On blended cost (weighted 3:1 toward input), Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta comes out cheaper by roughly 50% on input pricing. Pick Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta when the workload is price-sensitive and its context window covers your prompts; GPT 5.4 is the one to benchmark if you need vision, reasoning depth, or a different quality profile.
Frequently asked
› Is GPT 5.4 cheaper than Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta?
On input pricing, Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta is cheaper ($1.25 vs $2.5 per 1M tokens). On blended cost the winner is Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Experimental Beta, because output tokens are weighted differently for most workloads.
› Which has the larger context window?
GPT 5.4 offers the larger context (1.1M tokens).
› Do these prices include prompt caching?
Cached input is priced separately where a provider publishes a cache rate; the table above lists it per model so the comparison stays like-for-like.