OpenAIGPT-5.5
Reasoning effort
GPT-5.5 is an OpenAI proprietary reasoning model, released 23 Apr 2026. Its best configuration (xhigh reasoning effort) ranks #34 of 775 on the BenchLeader Index at 66.1 ±3.7, in the upper half. The ± is the point: 103 other configurations score within that range, so they and this one cannot be told apart on quality alone — price and speed are what separate them. It scores highest in reasoning (76) and lowest in agents & tools (61). At $11.25 per million tokens blended it is among the most expensive ranked models. Output speed of 92 tokens per second puts it faster than most, with a first answer in 52.1 s. It has been measured at 6 reasoning-effort settings; this summary describes the best-scoring one, and the tabs above switch between them. Last measured 19 Oct 2026.
- Blended price
- $11.25/M
- $5.00 in · $30.00 out
- Output speed
- 92 tok/s
- measured by Artificial Analysis
- First answer
- 52 s
- first token 3.34 s
- Context
- 1.1M
- Full answer
- 58 s
- median, reasoning included
- Cost per run
- $2.63
- one full Intelligence Index run
- Released
- 23 Apr 2026
- Overall index66
- Reasoning76
- Coding61
- Agents & tools61
- Maths70
- Knowledge65
- Instruction following74
- Multimodal63
- Long context67
- Composite73
Versions
OpenAI has shipped 11 models under this name. Each is ranked on its own results; a newer version often has fewer results so far, which holds its index nearer the average until more arrive.
| Model | Released | Index | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.6 | 9 Jul 2026 | – | – |
| GPT-5.5xhighthis page | 23 Apr 2026 | 66.1 | #34 |
| GPT-5.4xhigh | 5 Mar 2026 | 64.8 | #44 |
| GPT-5.2xhigh | 11 Dec 2025 | 60.7 | #107 |
| GPT-5.1high | 12 Nov 2025 | 57.8 | #169 |
| GPT-5high | 7 Aug 2025 | 58.0 | #165 |
| GPT-4.1 | 14 Apr 2025 | 48.4 | #420 |
| GPT-4.5 | 27 Feb 2025 | 49.8 | #380 |
| GPT 4 0125 | 25 Jan 2024 | 45.5 | #505 |
| GPT 4 0613 | 13 Jun 2023 | 39.8 | #662 |
| GPT-4 | 14 Mar 2023 | 43.4 | #555 |
Reasoning-effort configurations
The same model behaves differently depending on how much it is allowed to think. Each row is one setting, scored only on the benchmarks that were run at that setting. “Not stated” collects results from publishers that did not say which setting they used; for a reasoning model that is usually its thinking mode, but we do not assume it. Pick a setting here or at the top of the page to see its price, speed and category scores.
| Effort | Index | Rank | Speed | First answer | Chat reply cost | Categories |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no reasoning | 52.9 | #297 | 79 tok/s | 0.92 s | $0.011 | Agents & tools 54 · Coding 56 · Composite 55 · Instruction following 48 · Knowledge 59 · Long context 57 · Maths 49 · Multimodal 54 · Reasoning 50 |
| low | 59.8 | #122 | 81 tok/s | 1.84 s | $0.011 | Agents & tools 62 · Coding 56 · Composite 64 · Instruction following 64 · Knowledge 68 · Long context 66 · Maths 60 · Multimodal 62 · Reasoning 56 |
| medium | 63.0 | #74 | 87 tok/s | 5.54 s | $0.011 | Agents & tools 67 · Coding 60 · Composite 67 · Instruction following 70 · Knowledge 70 · Long context 67 · Multimodal 64 · Reasoning 67 |
| high | 65.5 | #37 | 88 tok/s | 21 s | $0.011 | Agents & tools 70 · Coding 61 · Composite 71 · Human preference 68 · Instruction following 70 · Knowledge 70 · Long context 67 · Maths 68 · Multimodal 64 · Reasoning 68 |
| xhighbest | 66.1 | #34 | 92 tok/s | 52 s | $0.011 | Agents & tools 61 · Coding 61 · Composite 73 · Instruction following 74 · Knowledge 65 · Long context 67 · Maths 70 · Multimodal 63 · Reasoning 76 |
| not stated | 60.4 | #111 | 59 tok/s | 3.34 s | $0.011 | Agents & tools 60 · Coding 55 · Composite 51 · Human preference 67 · Maths 69 · Multimodal 64 · Reasoning 70 |
What more thinking costs
Turning the effort up buys index points and multiplies the bill. Here xhigh costs 2.9× medium for +3.1 on the index — 2.0 points per doubling of spend. Compare that with other models.
How its index has moved
8 Sept 2026 to 19 Oct 2026- xhigh
- high
- medium
- not stated
The index is recomputed from scratch every day, so a line moves when a new benchmark result lands, when a publisher revises a score, or when the models it is normalised against change. Early movement usually means the score is still settling.
Benchmark results
See all LLM benchmarks. One column per reasoning effort. Rank is among every configuration of every model on that benchmark. Hover a score for the run it came from.
Reasoning
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3%#135 | 90.7%#39 | – | – | – | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| SimpleBencheffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 69.0%#15 | SimpleBench | |
| Arena Hard Prompts | – | – | – | 1501#31 | – | 1499#35 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoningnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 89.7%#14 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Reasoningnot in index | – | – | – | – | 89.7%#15 | – | LiveBench | |
| GPQA Diamond (AA)not in index | 76.8%#225 | 91.0%#54 | 92.6%#32 | 93.2%#22 | 93.5%#14 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA)not in index | 13.7%#264 | 32.7%#138 | 42.4%#68 | 45.0%#50 | 45.8%#48 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals)not in index | – | – | – | – | 93.2%#10 | – | Vals AI | |
| Kagi LLM Benchmarkeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 88.8%#2 | Kagi LLM Benchmark | |
| ARC-AGI-1 | – | 76.2%#122 | 92.2%#55 | 94.5%#37 | 95.0%#35 | – | ARC Prize | |
| ARC-AGI-2 | – | 33.3%#117 | 70.4%#55 | 83.3%#36 | 85.0%#30 | – | ARC Prize | |
| ARC-AGI-3 | – | – | – | 0.4%#46 | – | – | ARC Prize | |
| CritPt | 1.4%#207 | 8.0%#136 | 18.6%#67 | 25.4%#42 | 27.1%#33 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Chess Puzzlesnot in index | 9.0%#121 | 30.0%#67 | – | – | 63.0%#7 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Mystery Game Puzzlesnot in index | 18.0%#68 | 28.0%#38 | – | 52.0%#11 | 56.0%#9 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| CL-bench Lifenot in index | – | – | – | 22.2%#1 | – | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LMCAnot in index | – | – | – | – | 54.3%#47 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| DTBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 96.0%#30 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| ForecastBenchnot in index | – | – | – | 67.0%#1 | – | 64.4%#25 | ForecastBench | |
| BTF-3not in index | – | – | – | 14.3%#3 | – | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub |
Coding
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 47.3%#124 | 51.6%#93 | 54.5%#60 | 56.1%#41 | 55.8%#43 | – | SciCode | |
| WeirdML | 67.2%#38 | – | – | 83.9%#16 | 84.9%#14 | – | WeirdML | |
| FrontierCodeeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 43.0%#19 | Cognition | |
| GSO-Bench | – | – | – | – | 40.2%#9 | – | GSO-Bench | |
| Arena Coding | – | – | – | 1519#37 | – | 1511#59 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena WebDev | – | – | – | 1487#61 | 1513#55 | 1456#69 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Codingnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 85.1%#22 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Codingnot in index | – | – | – | – | 82.2%#10 | – | LiveBench | |
| SciCode (AA)not in index | – | – | 54.5%#61 | 56.1%#41 | 55.8%#44 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| LiveCodeBench | – | – | – | – | 85.3%#33 | – | Vals AI | |
| SWE-bench (Vals)not in index | – | – | – | – | 82.6%#19 | – | Vals AI | |
| Code Migrationnot in index | – | – | – | – | 45.2%#17 | – | Vals AI | |
| ProgramBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 0.5%#18 | – | Vals AI | |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1not in index | – | – | – | – | 69.8%#42 | – | Vals AI | |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAnot in index | – | – | – | – | 45.4%#8 | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoringnot in index | – | – | – | – | 44.8%#6 | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writingnot in index | – | – | – | – | 42.6%#9 | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| MirrorCodenot in index | – | – | – | 10.0%#8 | – | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Surface Evolver Benchnot in index | – | – | 81.3%#8 | 88.1%#5 | – | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| DeepSWE v1.1not in index | – | 27.0%#65 | 54.0%#40 | 64.4%#29 | 67.0%#22 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| ALE-Benchnot in index | 1127.6#50 | – | 1589.4#19 | – | 1943.0#11 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)not in index | – | – | 5.0%#100 | 9.1%#89 | 14.7%#70 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)not in index | 61.0%#94 | 65.5%#81 | 80.5%#42 | 79.4%#48 | 84.3%#30 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Agents & tools
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bencheffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 84.7%#1 | Terminal-Bench | |
| OSWorld-Verified 2.0 | – | – | – | – | 13.0%#9 | – | OSWorld | |
| Remote Labor Indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 6.3%#6 | Scale AI / CAIS | |
| APEX-Agentseffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 55.1%#19 | Mercor | |
| Arena Agent | – | – | – | – | 2.9#17 | -0.4#30 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench Long Agenticnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 44.6%#19 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Browsernot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 48.0%#30 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Agentic Codingnot in index | – | – | – | – | 54.0%#34 | – | LiveBench | |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 49.2%#24 | 52.3%#19 | 57.6%#11 | 59.9%#9 | 60.6%#7 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)not in index | 69.3%#156 | 83.9%#104 | 91.8%#55 | 93.0%#45 | 93.9%#37 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | – | – | 76.4%#16 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| MCP Atlas | – | – | – | – | 75.3%#18 | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| HiL-Bencheffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 39.7%#17 | Scale AI SEAL | |
| τ³-bench Bankingnot in index | – | – | – | – | 44.6%#5 | – | τ²-bench | |
| GDPval-AA v2.1not in index | 23.5%#169 | 27.2%#151 | 36.5%#116 | 41.3%#95 | 42.5%#89 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| τ³-Banking (AA) | 14.8%#118 | 24.9%#82 | 29.9%#65 | 36.7%#42 | 39.0%#34 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| ITBench SRE (AA)not in index | – | – | – | – | 45.8%#13 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Analyst Agent (AA)not in index | 7.5%#47 | – | – | – | 50.0%#10 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| APEX-Agents (AA)not in index | – | – | – | – | 37.7%#6 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Finance Agent v2not in index | – | – | – | – | 51.8%#38 | – | Vals AI | |
| Legal Research Benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 40.4%#29 | – | Vals AI | |
| SkillsBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 62.2%#5 | – | Vals AI | |
| SREBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 3.8%#19 | – | Vals AI | |
| Tax Agent Benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 21.8%#41 | – | Vals AI | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals)not in index | – | – | – | 73.2%#1 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Time Horizon Index: KSPnot in index | – | – | – | – | 8.3%#10 | – | Vals AI | |
| DeepResearch Benchnot in index | – | 48.7%#17 | 49.6%#12 | 54.0%#4 | – | – | DeepResearch Bench | |
| PostTrainBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 27.2%#9 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| ExploitBenchnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 47.4%#2 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| GBAEvalnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 53.2%#6 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Vending-Bench 2not in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 7523.8#15 | Andon Labs | |
| AutomationBenchnot in index | – | – | 40.1%#98 | 44.4%#90 | 47.3%#86 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| GDP.pdf (AA)not in index | – | – | 20.6%#61 | 22.6%#48 | 21.2%#54 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| EnterpriseOps-Gymnot in index | – | – | 44.1%#17 | – | 46.6%#12 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Maths
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | – | – | 85.3%#13 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | – | – | 72.5%#19 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 57.8%#166 | 84.4%#97 | – | – | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| ProofBench | – | – | – | 50.0%#30 | – | Vals AI | |
| LiveBench Mathematicsnot in index | – | – | – | 95.9%#14 | – | LiveBench | |
| AIME 2026possible contamination | – | – | – | 100.0%#1 | – | MathArena | |
| HMMT February 2026possible contamination | – | – | – | 98.5%#1 | – | MathArena | |
| USAMO 2026not in indexpossible contamination | – | – | – | 98.2%#1 | – | MathArena | |
| MathArena Apexpossible contamination | – | – | – | 80.2%#2 | – | MathArena | |
| Arena Maths | – | – | 1493#26 | – | 1501#16 | Arena (LMArena) |
Knowledge
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | – | – | – | – | 63.0%#14 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysisnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 81.6%#4 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Researchnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 61.6%#38 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Data Analysisnot in index | – | – | – | – | 81.6%#5 | – | LiveBench | |
| AA-Omniscience | -4.8#161 | 15.1#81 | 18.1#74 | 18.8#73 | 20.5#66 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| MMLU-Pro | – | – | – | – | 88.1%#21 | – | Vals AI | |
| LegalBench | – | – | – | – | 86.5%#13 | – | Vals AI | |
| CorpFin | – | – | – | – | 68.4%#8 | – | Vals AI | |
| TaxEval | – | – | – | – | 75.0%#24 | – | Vals AI | |
| CaseLaw v2not in index | – | – | – | – | 66.2%#7 | – | Vals AI | |
| Excel Modeling Benchmarknot in index | – | – | – | – | 64.5%#25 | – | Vals AI | |
| MedCodenot in index | – | – | – | – | 49.1%#27 | – | Vals AI | |
| MedScribenot in index | – | – | – | – | 86.9%#20 | – | Vals AI | |
| Public Benefits Benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 60.9%#31 | – | Vals AI | |
| DrugDiscoveryBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 51.6%#5 | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| EBR-benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 34.3%#11 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| GDP.pdfnot in index | – | – | – | – | 26.0%#16 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracynot in index | 45.6%#86 | 54.9%#38 | 56.8%#33 | 57.0%#32 | 58.0%#28 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationnot in index | 7.3%#481 | 12.0%#380 | 10.4%#406 | 10.9%#398 | 11.0%#396 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Instruction following
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Languagenot in index | – | – | – | – | 87.4%#9 | – | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Instruction Followingnot in index | – | – | – | – | 70.7%#27 | – | LiveBench | |
| IFBench | 46.1%#194 | 64.3%#109 | 71.0%#63 | 71.6%#52 | 75.8%#26 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Arena Instruction Followingnot in index | – | – | – | 1478#23 | – | 1475#25 | Arena (LMArena) |
Human preference
| Benchmark | high | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arena Text | 1481#26 | 1477#31 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| EQ-Bench 4effort not stated | – | 1315#4 | EQ-Bench | |
| Arena Creative Writingnot in index | 1451#37 | 1448#41 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Multi-turnnot in index | 1487#25 | 1484#33 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Longer Queriesnot in index | 1488#31 | 1487#33 | Arena (LMArena) |
Multimodal
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arena Vision | – | – | – | 1293#25 | – | 1297#21 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench Designnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 70.3%#37 | LiveBench | |
| MMMU-Pro | 71.4%#136 | 79.0%#64 | 81.2%#39 | 81.1%#40 | 79.9%#54 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| MMMU-Pro (Vals)not in index | – | – | – | – | 88.3%#8 | – | Vals AI | |
| MortgageTaxnot in index | – | – | – | – | 68.8%#10 | – | Vals AI | |
| SAGEnot in index | – | – | – | – | 51.5%#13 | – | Vals AI | |
| Blueprint-Bench 2not in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 36.2%#9 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub |
Long context
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA-LCR | 64.0%#257 | 81.0%#60 | 83.0%#25 | 84.3%#8 | 84.3%#8 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Arena Documentnot in index | – | – | – | 1480#11 | – | 1483#10 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| MLCRnot in index | 15.0%#46 | 11.1%#59 | – | – | 17.8%#36 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Composite
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Indexnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 159.7#14 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LiveBench 2.0effort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 68.7%#27 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0not in index | – | – | – | – | 80.2%#12 | – | LiveBench | |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 23.2#187 | 30.7#116 | 33.8#100 | 37.0#83 | 38.4#76 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Vals Multimodal Indexnot in index | – | – | – | – | 68.1%#9 | – | Vals AI |
Safety & honesty
| Benchmark | xhigh | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|
| FORTRESSnot in index | 16.3%#50 | Scale AI SEAL |
Where it wins
Benchmarks where this configuration ranks in the top five of every configuration measured.
Where to run it
Every provider serving this model through OpenRouter, with throughput and first-token latency measured on live traffic over the last 30 minutes and each provider’s own price. Purple marks the best in each column.
| Provider | Speed | First token | Input $/M | Output $/M | Context | Quantisation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Azure | 75 tok/s | 3.96 s | $5.50 | $33.00 | 1.1M | – |
| OpenAI | 57 tok/s | 2.71 s | $5.00 | $30.00 | 1.1M | – |
| Azure | 38 tok/s | 5.15 s | $5.50 | $33.00 | 1.1M | – |
| Azure | 34 tok/s | 4.27 s | $5.00 | $30.00 | 1.1M | – |
What a task costs
Estimates from list price, output speed and time to first answer for the best configuration. “With caching” assumes three-quarters of the input is served from the prompt cache at $0.500 per 1M. Reasoning tokens are not modelled.
| Workload | Tokens in / out | Cost | With caching | Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chat reply | 400 / 300 | $0.011 | $0.0097 | 55.4 s |
| Summarize a 30-page report | 12,000 / 600 | $0.078 | $0.037 | 58.7 s |
| Code edit | 6,000 / 1,500 | $0.075 | $0.055 | 1.1 min |
| Agentic coding session | 60,000 / 4,000 | $0.420 | $0.217 | 1.6 min |
| Structured extraction | 2,000 / 200 | $0.016 | $0.0093 | 54.3 s |
More from OpenAI
Compare GPT-5.5 with…
- GPT-5.5 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 4 Argon
- GPT-5.5 vs Muse Wonder Full
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-6 Astra
- GPT-5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- GPT-5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- GPT-5.5 vs Claude Fable 5
- GPT-5.5 vs Claude Opus 5
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- GPT-5.5 vs Muse Wonder
- GPT-5.5 vs Muse Spark 1.3
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-5.5 Pro
- GPT-5.5 vs Kimi K3
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-5.4
- GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- GPT-5.5 vs Muse Spark
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Terra
- GPT-5.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
- GPT-5.5 vs Grok 4.6
- GPT-5.5 vs Grok 4.7
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-5.3-Codex
- GPT-5.5 vs GLM 5.3
- GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- GPT-5.5 vs GPT-5.4 Pro
- GPT-5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.7
- GPT-5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.8
- GPT-5.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max
- GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
- GPT-5.5 vs Muse Spark 1.2
- GPT-5.5 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
- GPT-5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
- GPT-5.5 vs Muse Spark 1.1
- GPT-5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6
- GPT-5.5 vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- GPT-5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- GPT-5.5 vs GLM 5.2
- GPT-5.5 vs Qwen3.6 Max
See also
Data as of 21 Oct 2026. Compare these configurations.
Cite as: BenchLeader, “GPT-5.5: benchmarks, pricing, speed and rank”, https://www.benchleader.com/models/gpt-5-5, data as of 21 Oct 2026.