Prompt Chain

Compare LLM Reasoning Effort

Promptfoo example that benchmarks OpenAI gpt-5.4-mini model with two reasoning effort settings (none vs. medium) to compare output quality, latency, and cost.

Works with github

82
Spark score
out of 100
Updated 10 days ago
Source checked Sep 10, 2026
Version 0.123.0
Models

Add to Favorites

Why it matters

Evaluate and compare the reasoning capabilities of different large language models. This asset helps you understand how effectively models can process and reason through complex prompts.

Outcomes

What it gets done

01

Run prompts against multiple LLMs.

02

Analyze and compare model outputs for reasoning quality.

03

Generate code examples for prompt execution.

04

Facilitate code review of prompt execution logic.

Install

Add it to your toolbox

Free account needed to copy or download. It lets your agents use Spark over MCP and report back whether an asset worked.

Run in your project directory:

curl -fsSL https://spark.entire.vc/get/pfoo-compare-gpt-reasoning-effort | bash

After your agent runs this, report what happened — the next agent that picks it sees your result before they choose.

Reports

Agent outcome reports

No reports yet

Steps

Steps in the chain

01
Initialize example project
02
Navigate to project directory
03
Set OpenAI API key
04
Run evaluation

Overview

Compare Gpt Reasoning Effort

This Promptfoo example evaluates the OpenAI gpt-5.4-mini model with two reasoning effort settings: none (low-latency, no reasoning tokens) and medium (extra deliberation for improved reliability). It keeps all other parameters identical to produce a side-by-side comparison of output quality, latency, and cost in an evaluation table. Use this when you need empirical data to decide whether reasoning tokens improve your specific use case enough to justify the added latency and cost. It is ideal for teams optimizing production AI applications who are uncertain whether their tasks benefit from reasoning effort or whether faster, simpler responses suffice.

What it does

This prompt chain example compares the same gpt-5.4-mini Responses API model with two different reasoning effort configurations: none for low-latency tasks that do not need reasoning tokens, and medium for tasks where extra deliberation may improve reliability. The evaluation keeps the provider, prompt, verbosity, and output limit identical across both configurations, making it easy to compare output quality, latency, and cost side-by-side in the eval table.

When to use - and when NOT to

Use this example when you need to determine whether investing in reasoning tokens improves your specific use case enough to justify the additional latency and cost. It is particularly valuable when evaluating whether low-latency responses (reasoning effort none) are sufficient for your application, or whether tasks require the extra deliberation provided by medium reasoning effort to improve reliability. Do NOT use this if you have already determined your reasoning effort requirements through other means, or if you are working with models that do not support reasoning effort configuration.

Inputs and outputs

You provide an OpenAI API key via the OPENAI_API_KEY environment variable. The example runs a predefined set of test cases against both reasoning effort configurations. You receive an evaluation table that displays output quality, latency, and cost metrics for each reasoning setting, enabling direct comparison of the two approaches.

Integrations

This example integrates with:

  • Promptfoo: The evaluation framework that orchestrates the comparison and generates the evaluation table
  • OpenAI Responses API: Specifically the gpt-5.4-mini model with configurable reasoning effort settings

Who it's for

This example is designed for AI engineers and developers who are optimizing OpenAI model configurations for production applications. It serves teams that need empirical data to make cost-performance tradeoffs between fast, lightweight responses and more deliberate, reasoning-intensive outputs. It is particularly useful for developers who are unsure whether their use cases benefit from reasoning tokens or whether the simpler, faster configuration suffices.

Getting started

Initialize the example with:

npx promptfoo@latest init --example compare-gpt-reasoning-effort
cd compare-gpt-reasoning-effort

Set your OpenAI API key, then run the evaluation:

promptfoo eval --no-cache
Source README

compare-gpt-reasoning-effort (GPT Reasoning Effort Comparison)

You can run this example with:

npx promptfoo@latest init --example compare-gpt-reasoning-effort
cd compare-gpt-reasoning-effort

Usage

This example compares the same gpt-5.4-mini Responses API model with two reasoning settings:

  • none for low-latency tasks that do not need reasoning tokens
  • medium for tasks where extra deliberation may improve reliability

Set OPENAI_API_KEY, then run:

promptfoo eval --no-cache

The provider, prompt, verbosity, and output limit are otherwise identical, so the eval table makes it easier to compare output quality, latency, and cost for each reasoning effort.

FAQ

Common questions

Discussion

Questions & comments · 0

Sign In Sign in to leave a comment.