Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5 Nano vs o1

o1 leads GPT-5 Nano on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 15.2 to 13.0, and GPT-5 Nano costs 150.0x less per output token ($0.40 vs $60.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 61 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-5 Nano Replace o1
GPT-5 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
35.6
Output $/M
$0.40
13
o1OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
44.6
Output $/M
$60.00
47
vs boards won of 61 shared, 1 tied

GPT-5 Nano or o1: which to pick

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

Pick GPT-5 Nano for output tokens 150.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $60.00 per million) and a larger context window (400K against 200K tokens).

Model AGPT-5 NanoOpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmark$0.109 per solved taskModel Bo1OpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
61
GPT-5 Nano only
26
o1 only
8
Like-for-like categories
7 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-5 Nano not benchmarked, o1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 26.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Fiction.LiveBench: GPT-5 Nano 44.4% against o1 83.3%, 38.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5 Nano $0.40 against o1 $60.00 per million output tokens, 150.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-5 Nano takes 400K tokens, o1 200K.

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-5 NanoBarso1Ties
Coding33
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning38
Math521 tie
Knowledge010
General221
All shared boards13471 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index33
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured61.7%Only o1 measured
SWE-bench Verified34.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured39.7Only o1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)70.2%50.3%GPT-5 Nano
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)78.9%67.9%GPT-5 Nano
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)17.4%12.9%GPT-5 Nano
Terminal-Bench21.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
WeirdML38.1%46.1%o1
LMArena Text: coding13511367o1
LMArena Text: software and IT13451366o1
SciCodeNot measured4.6%Only o1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
AA Intelligence Index13.015.2o1
Epoch Capabilities Index139.2141.7o1
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom36.5%62.6%o1
METR time horizonsNot measured51.1%Only o1 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)51.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index38
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
GPQA Diamond63.4%73.2%o1
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)70.9%77.4%o1
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)67.6%74.7%o1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)9.5%7.0%GPT-5 Nano
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)69.4%76.8%o1
ARC-AGI20.7%30.7%o1
ARC-AGI-22.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
SimpleBenchNot measured40.1%Only o1 measured
Chess puzzles22.0%10.0%GPT-5 Nano
Mystery game puzzles9.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
VPCT37.2%37.0%GPT-5 Nano
LMArena Text: hard prompts13281371o1
LMArena Text: expert13211361o1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13381372o1
LMArena Vision: diagrams1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: homework1157Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index52
Math benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
AIME81.2%71.5%GPT-5 Nano
MATH 500 (Vals AI)93.8%90.4%GPT-5 Nano
MGSM (Vals AI)89.3%89.3%Tie
AA Math Index83.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)83.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME81.1%73.3%GPT-5 Nano
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 320.0%14.7%GPT-5 Nano
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
ProofBench12.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MATH level 595.2%94.7%GPT-5 Nano
LMArena Text: math13171388o1
LMArena Text: mathematical work13261390o1
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index010
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
MMLU Pro76.1%83.5%o1
LegalBench (Vals AI)50.1%80.4%o1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)52.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)67.4%74.3%o1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)53.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.3%96.5%o1
MedCode (Vals AI)30.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%84.1%o1
SimpleQA Verified11.7%41.1%o1
GeoBenchNot measured80.0%Only o1 measured
LMArena Text: science13181369o1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13351355o1
LMArena Text: legal and government12981368o1
LMArena Text: business and finance13111328o1
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
Design Arena: websites1101Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: UI components1064Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: game dev1044Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: data viz1056Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: 3D965Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Design Arena: all code categories1084Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index221
General benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)30.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)72.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
IFBench67.6%70.3%o1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)45.0%65.0%o1
DTBench62.7%74.7%o1
LMCA7.9%22.3%o1
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%83.3%o1
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured70.2%Only o1 measured
LMArena Text13201366o1
LMArena Text: instruction following13061367o1
LMArena Text: creative writing12491347o1
LMArena Vision11591168o1
LMArena Text: English13211372o1
LMArena Text: non-English13131358o1
LMArena Text: Chinese13561394o1
LMArena Text: German13271337o1
LMArena Text: Japanese12271346o1
LMArena Text: Korean12691396o1
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1344Only o1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish13601345GPT-5 Nano
LMArena Text: Russian12961356o1
LMArena Text: Polish1314Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13111355o1
LMArena Text: longer queries13121378o1
LMArena Text: writing and language12831360o1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12681358o1
LMArena Vision: English11701162GPT-5 Nano
LMArena Vision: Chinese11761235o1
LMArena Vision: reading text1152Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: humor1110Not measuredOnly GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5 Nano and o1
BenchmarkGPT-5 Nanoo1Leader
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-5 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request
o1$0.045Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5 Nano$0.0037Fits in one request
o1$0.930Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5 Nano$0.014Fits in one request
o1$3.60Exceeds the context window

GPT-5 Nano 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-5 Nano and o1
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5 NanoOpenAI o1
MakerOpenAIOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 7, 2025December 17, 2024
Context window400K200K
Input $/Mtok$0.05$15.00
Output $/Mtok$0.40$60.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved task$0.109Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5 Nano better than o1 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5 Nano for output tokens 150.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $60.00 per million) and a larger context window (400K against 200K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Nano or o1?

GPT-5 Nano costs $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; o1 costs $15.00 and $60.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5 Nano only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5 Nano or o1?

GPT-5 Nano, with 400K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5 Nano vs o1 comparison based on?

61 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5 Nano's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and o1's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next