The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GPT-4o vs LongCat-Flash-Lite

LongCat-Flash-Lite leads the LLM Stats Score 18.8 to 14.2. LongCat-Flash-Lite is 25.0x cheaper per token.

OpenAI · Meituan · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

LongCat-Flash-Lite leads the overall LLM Stats Score 18.8 to 14.2, ranking #208 overall.

In the 8 individual benchmarks reported for both models, LongCat-Flash-Lite wins 6; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, LongCat-Flash-Lite is roughly 25.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

LongCat-Flash-Lite also accepts a larger context window (256,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose GPT-4o

  • you want predictable pricing at $2.50/M input and $10.00/M output

Choose LongCat-Flash-Lite

  • overall performance matters — it scores 18.8 and ranks #208 on LLM Stats
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 8 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 25.0x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 256,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GPT-4o
OpenAI
LongCat-Flash-Lite
Meituan
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
14.2
#236
18.8
#208
Reasoning
16.0
#217
19.0
#201
Coding
-0.6
#243
7.2
#185
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 8
6 of 8
Input price
$2.50 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$10.00 / M
$0.40 / M
Context window
128,000
256,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

5 shared
Index
GPT-4o
LongCat-Flash-Lite
Math
12.6#232
17.2#195
Tool use
5.6#149
9.7#129
Writing
6.3#91
13.9#53
Finance
16.3#114
18.2#97
Legal
16.3#96
18.2#83
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

38 reported for GPT-4o · 13 for LongCat-Flash-Lite

8 shared

GPT-4o outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU), while LongCat-Flash-Lite is better at 6 benchmarks (AIME 2024, MMLU-Pro, SWE-Bench Verified, Tau2 Airline, Tau2 Retail, Tau2 Telecom).

LongCat-Flash-Lite shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

LongCat-Flash-Lite costs less

For input processing, GPT-4o ($2.50/1M tokens) is 25.0x more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Lite ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, GPT-4o ($10.00/1M tokens) is 25.0x more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Lite ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GPT-4o is more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Lite.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com
OpenAI
GPT-4o
Input tokens$2.50
Output tokens$10.00
Best providerAzure
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Lite
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerMeituan
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

LongCat-Flash-Lite accepts 256,000 input tokens compared to GPT-4o's 128,000 tokens. LongCat-Flash-Lite can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while GPT-4o is limited to 16,384 tokens.

OpenAI
GPT-4o
Input128,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Lite
Input256,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

GPT-4o supports multimodal inputs, whereas LongCat-Flash-Lite does not.

GPT-4o can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GPT-4o

Text
Images
Audio
Video

LongCat-Flash-Lite

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GPT-4o is licensed under a proprietary license, while LongCat-Flash-Lite uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

GPT-4o

Proprietary

Closed source

LongCat-Flash-Lite

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GPT-4o was released on 2024-08-06, while LongCat-Flash-Lite was released on 2026-02-05.

LongCat-Flash-Lite is 18 months newer than GPT-4o.

GPT-4o

Aug 6, 2024

2.1 years ago

LongCat-Flash-Lite

Feb 5, 2026

7 months ago

1.5yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

GPT-4o is available from Azure, OpenAI. LongCat-Flash-Lite is available from Meituan.

GPT-4o

azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $2.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $10.00/1M
openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $2.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $10.00/1M

LongCat-Flash-Lite

meituan logo
Meituan
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GPT-4o and LongCat-Flash-Lite side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GPT-4o
✓ Preferred
LongCat-Flash-Lite
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GPT-4o vs LongCat-Flash-Lite.

Which is better, GPT-4o or LongCat-Flash-Lite?

LongCat-Flash-Lite leads the LLM Stats Score 18.8 to 14.2. GPT-4o is made by OpenAI and LongCat-Flash-Lite is made by Meituan. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does GPT-4o compare to LongCat-Flash-Lite in benchmarks?

GPT-4o scores AI2D: 94.2%, DocVQA: 92.8%, ChartQA: 85.7%, MMLU: 85.7%, CharXiv-D: 85.3%. LongCat-Flash-Lite scores MATH-500: 96.8%, MMLU: 85.5%, CMMLU: 82.5%, MMLU-Pro: 78.3%, Tau2 Retail: 73.1%.

Is GPT-4o cheaper than LongCat-Flash-Lite?

LongCat-Flash-Lite is 25.0x cheaper for input tokens. GPT-4o costs $2.50/M input and $10.00/M output via azure. LongCat-Flash-Lite costs $0.10/M input and $0.40/M output via meituan.

What are the context window sizes for GPT-4o and LongCat-Flash-Lite?

GPT-4o supports 128K tokens and LongCat-Flash-Lite supports 256K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GPT-4o and LongCat-Flash-Lite?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (14.2 vs 18.8), context window (128K vs 256K), input pricing ($2.50 vs $0.10/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GPT-4o and LongCat-Flash-Lite?

GPT-4o is developed by OpenAI and LongCat-Flash-Lite is developed by Meituan.

Related comparisons