Model comparison
GPT-4 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
GPT-5.6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4 scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.6 Sol in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.6 Sol leads 85.5 to 10.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.1% for GPT-4 and 100% for GPT-5.6 Sol.
- GPT-5.6 Sol is cheaper at $4 / $20 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $60 for GPT-4.
- GPT-5.6 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 8K.
Side by side
| GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 28.9 | 64.4 |
| Released | 2023-03-14 | 2026-07-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 8K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 8K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $30 | $4 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $60 | $20 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 64 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-4: 31.2 (#277), GPT-5.6 Sol: 61.1 (#7)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 12.4% | 89.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1254 | 1493 |
| DeepSWE | — | 72.7% |
| FrontierCode | — | 47.5% |
| CursorBench | — | 41.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1619 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 32.2% |
| SciCode | — | 57.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46% | — |
| MirrorCode | — | 20% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 2,177 |
| HumanEval+ | 79.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4: —, GPT-5.6 Sol: 50.2 (#7)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 51.4% |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 27.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 46.9% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 36.2% |
| BALROG | — | 60% |
| GBAEval | — | 52.6% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 30.7% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1257 |
| METR Time Horizons | 36.1% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 9,619 |
Reasoning GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-4: 17.3 (#285), GPT-5.6 Sol: 74.7 (#6)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 4% | 64% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1241 | 1481 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 12% | 58% |
| DTBench | 62.7% | 96% |
| LMCA | 17.1% | 59.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 125.88 | 161.99 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 92.5% |
| SimpleBench | — | 71.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 67% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 93.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 97.5% |
| CritPt | — | 32.3% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 37.1% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 44.8% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 93.1% |
| Bench to the Future 3 | — | 0.14 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 75.1% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.8 | — |
| HellaSwag | 95.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 87.5% | — |
Math GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-4: 10.1 (#304), GPT-5.6 Sol: 85.5 (#7)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | 100% |
| LMArena Math | 1269 | 1472 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 89.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 82.9% |
| ProofBench | — | 83% |
| MATH Level 5 | 23% | — |
| FrontierMath Erdős | — | 0% |
| GSM8K | 92% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-4: 18.4 (#277), GPT-5.6 Sol: 64.3 (#16)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 35.7% | 93.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1211 | 1517 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 69.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.4% |
| MMLU | 86.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 84.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-4: —, GPT-5.6 Sol: 48.9 (#8)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1281 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 33.6% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 56.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1483 |
Multilingual GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-4: 40.8 (#210), GPT-5.6 Sol: 55.4 (#32)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1246 | 1450 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1242 | 1523 |
| LMArena French | 1282 | 1475 |
| LMArena German | 1251 | 1476 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1209 | 1475 |
| LMArena Korean | 1184 | 1434 |
| LMArena Russian | 1251 | 1466 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1261 | 1449 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-4: 65.5 (#217), GPT-5.6 Sol: 77.8 (#16)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1241 | 1480 |
Long Context GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-4: 37.7 (#207), GPT-5.6 Sol: 45.3 (#42)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1244 | 1479 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-4: 35.0 (#263), GPT-5.6 Sol: 73.5 (#12)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1263 | 1456 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1244 | 1450 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 752 | 1972 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1257 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1250 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4 better than GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol is cheaper. It lists at $4 per million input tokens and $20 per million output tokens; GPT-4 lists at $30 and $60.
Is GPT-4 or GPT-5.6 Sol better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 61.1 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.6 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4 and GPT-5.6 Sol share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4 has 38 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.6 Sol has 64.