Model comparison
GPT-5.5 vs o1
GPT-5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 63.4 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 30 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and o1 in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.5 leads 81.7 to 36.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 85.3% for GPT-5.5 and 14.7% for o1.
- GPT-5.5 is cheaper at $5 / $30 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- GPT-5.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.5 | o1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 63.4 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-23 | 2024-09-12 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 200K |
| Max output | 128K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | $15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $30 | $60 |
| Results tracked | 71 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 58.2 (#17), o1: 46.1 (#70)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 84.9% | 47.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1494 | 1367 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.6% | — |
| DeepSWE | 67% | — |
| FrontierCode | 43% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 61.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1513 | — |
| SciCode | 56.1% | — |
| GSO | 40.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 69.7% |
| MirrorCode | 10% | — |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,943 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 80.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 50.7 (#6), o1: 24.6 (#117)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 84.7% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 55.1% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 13% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 6.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 44.6% | — |
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 54% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 27.2% | — |
| ExploitBench | 47.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 53.2% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 26% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1242 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 51.1% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 7,524 | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 72.8 (#11), o1: 27.9 (#111)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 69% | 41.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 95% | 30.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 54% | 15% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1489 | 1371 |
| DTBench | 96% | 74.7% |
| LMCA | 54.3% | 22.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 159.1 | 141.91 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 85% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 88.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 96.2% | — |
| CritPt | 27.1% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.7% |
| EBR-Bench | 34.3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 91.6% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 56% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 88.1% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 75.7% |
Math GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 81.7 (#11), o1: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 85.3% | 14.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1486 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 51.7% | 9.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 72.5% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 94.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 50% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 80.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 35.4% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 64.4 (#17), o1: 41.5 (#110)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94% | 76.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 63% | 41.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1508 | 1361 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8% |
| Confabulations | — | 11.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multimodal GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 46.9 (#12), o1: 34.2 (#93)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1297 | 1168 |
| GeoBench | — | 80% |
| VPCT | — | 37% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 36.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 44.2% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1486 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |
Multilingual GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 56.4 (#20), o1: 48.6 (#142)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1467 | 1358 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1533 | 1394 |
| LMArena French | 1486 | 1344 |
| LMArena German | 1480 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1498 | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | 1460 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1473 | 1356 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1468 | 1345 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 77.5 (#18), o1: 74.8 (#86)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1479 | 1367 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |
Long Context o1 leads
GPT-5.5: 48.3 (#12), o1: 50.3 (#9)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1484 | 1378 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
| CL-bench Life | 22.2% | — |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.5 leads
GPT-5.5: 72.7 (#13), o1: 55.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1472 | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1455 | 1348 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1476 | 1369 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 70.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1844 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1315 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 65.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.5 better than o1?
GPT-5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 63.4 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.5 or o1?
GPT-5.5 is cheaper. It lists at $5 per million input tokens and $30 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.
Is GPT-5.5 or o1 better for coding?
GPT-5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.2 versus 46.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.5 and o1 share?
30 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.5 has 71 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.