Model comparison
GPT-5.1 vs o1
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.1 #101 (Estimated); o1 #136 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.1 and o1 share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to GPT-5.1; 3 to o1.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- GPT-5.1 only
- 8
- o1 only
- 3
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GPT-5.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o1 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.1 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 52.66 to 47.14. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.1's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 26.4 against 9.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 31.034% to 9.310%.
o1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $60.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.1. That is roughly 6.0x on output cost alone.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | GPT-5.1 | Δ | o1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-5.126.4 | Margin← 17.1 | o19.3 |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | o175.7 |
| Inst. Following | GPT-5.1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | o192.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 31.034%B 9.310%Winner: GPT-5.1Δ 21.7FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-5.1 scored 31.034%; o1 scored 9.310%. GPT-5.1 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.1 | o1 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.1$1.25 input / $10 output | o1$15 input / $60 output | GPT-5.1 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.1111 tok/s | o198 tok/s | GPT-5.1 has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.157.47 s | o132.29 s | o1 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.1200K | o1200K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | o1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.9% | 23.4% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.3% | 74.7% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 26.5% | 7.7% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 5.6% | -10.5% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 37.6% | 34.7% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 51.3% | 69.3% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| MMLUSource | — | 91.8% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 75.7% | Not comparable |
MathGPT-5.1 wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-5.1 or o1?
GPT-5.1 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 52.66 to 47.14. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 31.034% and 9.310%.
Which is better for math, GPT-5.1 or o1?
GPT-5.1 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 26.4 versus 9.3. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.