Nova Micro 1.0 vs GPT-5.4
GPT-5.4 leads Nova Micro 1.0 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 39.0 to 5.9, and Nova Micro 1.0 costs 107.1x less per output token ($0.14 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 34 benchmarks have a result for both.
Nova Micro 1.0 or GPT-5.4: which to pick
Only GPT-5.4 has a coding score, 64.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Micro 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Nova Micro 1.0 for output tokens 107.1x cheaper ($0.14 vs $15.00 per million).
- Shared results
- 34
- Nova Micro 1.0 only
- 5
- GPT-5.4 only
- 76
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only GPT-5.4 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
GPT-5.4
GPT-5.4 leads, 39.0 against 5.9.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GPT-5.4 has a GPQA Diamond result, 91.7%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only GPT-5.4 has a AIME result, 96.7%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GPT-5.4 has a MMLU Pro result, 87.5%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only GPT-5.4 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1199.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5.4
GPT-5.4 takes 1.05M tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Micro 1.0
Nova Micro 1.0 $0.0001, GPT-5.4 $0.010 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only GPT-5.4 has the number, $1.02.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nova Micro 1.0 not benchmarked, GPT-5.4 64.4 from 3 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 73.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: Nova Micro 1.0 14.0% against GPT-5.4 87.1%, 73.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nova Micro 1.0 $0.14 against GPT-5.4 $15.00 per million output tokens, 107.1x apart.
- Context window
- Nova Micro 1.0 takes 128K tokens, GPT-5.4 1.05M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Nova Micro 1.0 | Bars | GPT-5.4 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 3 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 5 | ||
| Math | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 4 | ||
| General | 0 | 18 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 34 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1464 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 71.1 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.1% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 78.2% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 67.4% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 35.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.5% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 51.7% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 14.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Micro 1.0 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 1.5% | 57.6% | GPT-5.4 |
| Terminal-Bench | Not measured | 81.8% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| GSO-Bench | Not measured | 31.4% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 77.7% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| MirrorCode | Not measured | 15.6% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 1607.0 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1218 | 1496 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1215 | 1491 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1454 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1478 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | Not measured | 1436 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 5.9 | 39.0 | GPT-5.4 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 157.3 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1059 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | Not measured | 1017 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | Not measured | 1087 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1030 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | Not measured | 1135 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 14.0% | 87.1% | GPT-5.4 |
| APEX-Agents | Not measured | 52.4% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| METR time horizons | Not measured | 74.3% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | Not measured | 35.1% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| PostTrainBench | Not measured | 19.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Not measured | $6,144 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 91.7% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | Not measured | 87.5% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 35.8% | 92.0% | GPT-5.4 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.6% | 43.7% | GPT-5.4 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 93.3% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| ARC-AGI | Not measured | 93.7% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | Not measured | 74.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Chess puzzles | Not measured | 48.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 37.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| EBR-bench | Not measured | 25.4% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1191 | 1485 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1183 | 1507 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1203 | 1479 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1327 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1336 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | Not measured | 63.8% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 96.7% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| AA Math Index | 6.0 | Not measured | Only Nova Micro 1.0 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Micro 1.0 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 97.8% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 78.6% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | Not measured | 49.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 56.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1206 | 1488 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1212 | 1497 | GPT-5.4 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 87.5% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 86.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 63.8% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 65.3% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 74.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.3% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | Not measured | 96.1% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 41.3% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 53.1% | Not measured | Only Nova Micro 1.0 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not measured | 45.1% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| MMLU | 70.8% | Not measured | Only Nova Micro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1210 | 1479 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1207 | 1458 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1221 | 1486 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1182 | 1474 | GPT-5.4 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1199 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1215 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1195 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1196 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1066 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1180 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1142 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1188 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index018
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 43.3% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 77.5% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| IFBench | 29.4% | 73.9% | GPT-5.4 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 13.0% | 82.0% | GPT-5.4 |
| DTBench | Not measured | 94.4% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 52.0% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| CL-bench | Not measured | 27.9% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Furniture assembly | Not measured | 37.5% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| CL-bench Life | Not measured | 21.7% | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1208 | 1469 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1174 | 1469 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1172 | 1439 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1303 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1224 | 1467 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1186 | 1465 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1209 | 1520 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: German | 1192 | 1472 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1154 | 1485 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1150 | 1449 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: French | 1238 | 1493 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1225 | 1452 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1185 | 1480 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1472 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1178 | 1482 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1205 | 1473 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1192 | 1458 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1163 | 1438 | GPT-5.4 |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1301 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1354 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1312 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1284 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | Not measured | 1251 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1283 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| LMArena Document | Not measured | 1471 | Only GPT-5.4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Micro 1.0 | GPT-5.4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Micro 1.0 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nova Micro 1.0 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nova Micro 1.0 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Amazon Nova Micro 1.0 | OpenAI GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Amazon | OpenAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | December 5, 2024 | March 5, 2026 |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.035 | $2.50 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.14 | $15.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 64.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 3 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $1.02 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nova Micro 1.0 better than GPT-5.4 for coding?
Only GPT-5.4 has a coding score, 64.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Micro 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nova Micro 1.0 for output tokens 107.1x cheaper ($0.14 vs $15.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Nova Micro 1.0 or GPT-5.4?
Nova Micro 1.0 costs $0.035 per million input tokens and $0.14 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 costs $2.50 and $15.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.4 only.
Which has the bigger context window, Nova Micro 1.0 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the Nova Micro 1.0 vs GPT-5.4 comparison based on?
34 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Micro 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.4's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.