LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) vs GPT-5.5

Updated October 21, 2026. 14 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-4o (2024-11-20)OpenAI
Coding
18.2
Overall
8.4
Output $/M
$10.00
0
GPT-5.5OpenAI
Coding
67.8
Overall
38.4
Output $/M
$30.00
14
vs boards won of 14 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5.5 for coding: it scores 67.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 18.2 for GPT-4o (2024-11-20).

Pick GPT-4o (2024-11-20) when output tokens cost 3.0x less.

Shared results
14
GPT-4o (2024-11-20) only
10
GPT-5.5 only
118
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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-4o (2024-11-20) 18.2 from 1 benchmark, GPT-5.5 67.8 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 78.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GPT-4o (2024-11-20) 6.3% against GPT-5.5 84.4%, 78.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o (2024-11-20) $10.00 against GPT-5.5 $30.00 per million output tokens, 3.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o (2024-11-20) takes 128K tokens, GPT-5.5 1.05M.

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-4o (2024-11-20)BarsGPT-5.5Ties
Coding03
Intelligence01
Reasoning03
Math01
Knowledge06
All shared boards014
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
Aider polyglot18.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LiveBench codingNot measured85.1%Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1513Only GPT-5.5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured74.9Only GPT-5.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)43.4%85.3%GPT-5.5
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured82.6%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured69.8%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured45.2%Only GPT-5.5 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured76.4%Only GPT-5.5 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured62.5%Only GPT-5.5 measured
SciCodeNot measured56.1%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured60.6%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured84.7%Only GPT-5.5 measured
FrontierCodeNot measured43.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
GSO-Bench0.0%40.2%GPT-5.5
WeirdML25.1%84.9%GPT-5.5
MirrorCodeNot measured10.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Cybench12.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1943.0Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1494Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1493Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1506Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1543Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1532Only GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index8.438.4GPT-5.5
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured159.7Only GPT-5.5 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index26 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured36.4Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1117Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1089Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1143Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1169Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1173Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1179Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1067Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1108Only GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench researchNot measured61.6%Only GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench browserNot measured48.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured44.6%Only GPT-5.5 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured3.8%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured51.8%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured21.8%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured40.4%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured64.5%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)Not measured8.3%Only GPT-5.5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured93.9%Only GPT-5.5 measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured55.1%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Remote Labor IndexNot measured6.3%Only GPT-5.5 measured
OSWorld 2.0Not measured13.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured54.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
PostTrainBenchNot measured27.2%Only GPT-5.5 measured
TheAgentCompany8.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$7,524Only GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
GPQA Diamond53.8%93.2%GPT-5.5
LiveBench reasoningNot measured89.7%Only GPT-5.5 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)62.2%88.3%GPT-5.5
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured93.5%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured45.8%Only GPT-5.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.9%90.7%GPT-5.5
ARC-AGINot measured95.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured85.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured69.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured63.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured56.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
EBR-benchNot measured34.3%Only GPT-5.5 measured
VPCT40.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1489Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1507Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1483Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1325Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1332Only GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
AIME11.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)74.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
OTIS Mock AIME6.3%84.4%GPT-5.5
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured85.3%Only GPT-5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured72.5%Only GPT-5.5 measured
ProofBenchNot measured50.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
MATH level 549.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1487Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1496Only GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
MMLU Pro72.6%88.1%GPT-5.5
LegalBench (Vals AI)82.2%86.5%GPT-5.5
CaseLaw (Vals AI)59.7%66.2%GPT-5.5
CorpFin (Vals AI)45.9%68.4%GPT-5.5
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.5%75.0%GPT-5.5
MortgageTax (Vals AI)57.4%68.8%GPT-5.5
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured49.1%Only GPT-5.5 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured63.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
GeoBench71.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1485Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1465Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1491Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1478Only GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1256Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1260Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1294Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1265Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1198Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1260Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1234Only GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1254Only GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench designNot measured70.3%Only GPT-5.5 measured
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index39 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured81.6%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured60.9%Only GPT-5.5 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured51.5%Only GPT-5.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured86.9%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured68.1%Only GPT-5.5 measured
IFBenchNot measured75.9%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured84.3%Only GPT-5.5 measured
DTBenchNot measured96.0%Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMCANot measured54.3%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)81.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured88.1%Only GPT-5.5 measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured44.2%Only GPT-5.5 measured
ExploitBenchNot measured47.4%Only GPT-5.5 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured22.2%Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1471Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1478Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1455Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1297Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1470Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1467Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1534Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1480Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1499Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1460Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1485Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1468Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1473Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1465Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1476Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1484Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1466Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1449Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1292Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1360Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1306Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1293Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1231Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1301Only GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1486Only GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)GPT-5.5Leader
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-4o (2024-11-20)$0.0075Fits in one request
GPT-5.5$0.020Fits in one request

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-11-20)$0.155Fits in one request
GPT-5.5$0.340Fits in one request

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-11-20)$0.600Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.5$1.30Fits in one request

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) 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-4o (2024-11-20) and GPT-5.5
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-11-20)OpenAI GPT-5.5
MakerOpenAIOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedNovember 20, 2024April 24, 2026
Context window128K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$2.50$5.00
Output $/Mtok$10.00$30.00
Coding index18.267.8
Independent measurements behind it12
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.65
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o (2024-11-20) better than GPT-5.5 for coding?

Pick GPT-5.5 for coding: it scores 67.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 18.2 for GPT-4o (2024-11-20). Pick GPT-4o (2024-11-20) when output tokens cost 3.0x less.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (2024-11-20) or GPT-5.5?

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GPT-5.5 costs $5.00 and $30.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4o (2024-11-20) or GPT-5.5?

GPT-5.5, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o (2024-11-20) vs GPT-5.5 comparison based on?

14 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4o (2024-11-20)'s coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-5.5's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next