Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct vs GPT-4o (2024-05-13)

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct costs 7.5x less per output token than GPT-4o (2024-05-13) ($2.00 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-3.5 Turbo InstructOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.00
0
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
27.1
Output $/M
$15.00
1
vs boards won of 1 shared

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct or GPT-4o (2024-05-13): which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct for output tokens 7.5x cheaper ($2.00 vs $15.00 per million) and work measured by METR time horizons, where it leads.

Shared results
1
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct only
0
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) only
43
Like-for-like categories
1 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct not benchmarked, GPT-4o (2024-05-13) not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 19.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
METR time horizons: GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct 21.5% against GPT-4o (2024-05-13) 40.8%, 19.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct $2.00 against GPT-4o (2024-05-13) $15.00 per million output tokens, 7.5x apart.
Context window
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct takes 4K tokens, GPT-4o (2024-05-13) 128K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructBarsGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Ties
Agentic work01
All shared boards01
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
AA Coding IndexNot measured24.2Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured33.4%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1297Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1297Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured7.3Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
METR time horizons21.5%40.8%GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BALROGNot measured32.3%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured50.2%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured52.6%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured1.8%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured48.9%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1281Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1250Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1293Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured6.3%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
MATH level 5Not measured51.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1284Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1284Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured74.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
MMLUNot measured84.2%Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1295Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1278Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1314Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1262Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
LMArena TextNot measured1300Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1278Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1291Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1137Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1312Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1283Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1277Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1283Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1257Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1234Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1304Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1292Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1285Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1365Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1302Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1288Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1298Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1289Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1147Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1132Only GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
BenchmarkGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct$0.0025Fits in one request
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$0.013Fits in one request

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct$0.081Exceeds the context window
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$0.295Fits in one request

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct$0.320Exceeds the context window
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$1.15Exceeds the context window

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-3.5 Turbo InstructOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-05-13)
MakerOpenAIOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 28, 2023May 13, 2024
Context window4K128K
Input $/Mtok$1.50$5.00
Output $/Mtok$2.00$15.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct better than GPT-4o (2024-05-13) for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct for output tokens 7.5x cheaper ($2.00 vs $15.00 per million) and work measured by METR time horizons, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct or GPT-4o (2024-05-13)?

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct costs $1.50 per million input tokens and $2.00 per million output tokens; GPT-4o (2024-05-13) costs $5.00 and $15.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct or GPT-4o (2024-05-13)?

GPT-4o (2024-05-13), with 128K tokens against 4K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct vs GPT-4o (2024-05-13) comparison based on?

1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-4o (2024-05-13)'s on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next