Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemma 4 E2B
24
GPT-5.5
91
Verified leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 E2B unranked · GPT-5.5 #5
Pick GPT-5.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E2B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Knowledge
+12.3 difference
Gemma 4 E2B
GPT-5.5
$0 / $0
$5 / $30
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
128K
1M
Pick GPT-5.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E2B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
GPT-5.5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 91 to 24. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.5's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 66.4 against 54.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 43.4% to 93.6%.
GPT-5.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 E2B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. GPT-5.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Gemma 4 E2B.
GPT-5.5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 91 to 24. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 43.4% and 93.6%.
GPT-5.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.4 versus 54.1. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.