Model comparison
GPT-5.4 mini vs GPT-5.5
Head-to-head evidence from 30 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 mini #75 (Estimated); GPT-5.5 #9 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 mini and GPT-5.5 share 30 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to GPT-5.4 mini; 27 to GPT-5.5.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 30
- GPT-5.4 mini only
- 0
- GPT-5.5 only
- 27
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick GPT-5.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 mini only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 30 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 73.51 to 56.77. 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 mathematics, where it averages 47.6 against 21.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4), 2.080% to 35.400%. GPT-5.4 mini does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-5.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.75 input / $4.50 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.4 mini. That is roughly 6.7x on output cost alone. GPT-5.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.4 mini.
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-5.4 mini | Δ | GPT-5.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-5.4 mini21.7 | Margin→ 25.9 | GPT-5.547.6 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.4 mini65.7 | Margin→ 15.9 | GPT-5.581.6 |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.4 mini47.8 | Margin→ 10.0 | GPT-5.557.8 |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.4 mini76.6 | Margin← 6.2 | GPT-5.570.4 |
| Coding | GPT-5.4 miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.558.6 |
| Reasoning | GPT-5.4 miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.585.0 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 2.080%B 35.400%Winner: GPT-5.5Δ 33.3FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GPT-5.4 mini scored 2.080%; GPT-5.5 scored 35.400%. GPT-5.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 28.280%B 51.700%Winner: GPT-5.5Δ 23.4FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-5.4 mini scored 28.280%; GPT-5.5 scored 51.700%. GPT-5.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 60%B 82%Winner: GPT-5.5Δ 22Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.4 mini scored 60%; GPT-5.5 scored 82%. GPT-5.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 41.5%B 52.2%Winner: GPT-5.5Δ 10.7HLE: GPT-5.4 mini scored 41.5%; GPT-5.5 scored 52.2%. GPT-5.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 72.1%B 78.7%Winner: GPT-5.5Δ 6.6OSWorld-Verified: GPT-5.4 mini scored 72.1%; GPT-5.5 scored 78.7%. GPT-5.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 mini | GPT-5.5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.4 mini$0.75 input / $4.5 output | GPT-5.5$5 input / $30 output | GPT-5.4 mini has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.4 mini201 tok/s | GPT-5.5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.4 mini3.85 s | GPT-5.5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.4 mini400K | GPT-5.51M | GPT-5.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.5 wins24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | GPT-5.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 60% | 82% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 72.1% | 78.7% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 57.7% | 75.3% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 42.9% | 55.6% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 83.3% | 93.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 30.2% | 44.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 28.2% | 37.7% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 33.6% | 49.5% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1171 | 1490 | GPT-5.5 leads |
| CyberGymSource | — | 81.8% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 72.93% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 17.0% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 13.0% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 42.7% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 13.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1154 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 42.1% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 46.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 86.3% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 45.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 31.3% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 60.6% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 84.3% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | GPT-5.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 47.97% | 69.85% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 56.1% | 74.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 49.9% | 56.1% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 27.0% | 43.0% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 58.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 82.0% | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | — | 84.7% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | — | 59.2% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 58.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.5 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | GPT-5.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 88% | 93.6% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| HLESource | 41.5% | 52.2% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 28.2% | 41.4% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.0% | 54.8% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.5% | 93.5% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 26.6% | 44.3% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -18.7% | 20.1% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 37.5% | 56.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 89.8% | 85.5% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 93.6% | Not comparable |
MathGPT-5.5 wins3 benchmarks
MultimodalGPT-5.4 mini wins5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | GPT-5.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.3% | 75.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, GPT-5.4 mini or GPT-5.5?
GPT-5.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 73.51 to 56.77. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4), where the scores are 2.080% and 35.400%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.4 mini or GPT-5.5?
GPT-5.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 57.8 versus 47.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, GPT-5.4 mini or GPT-5.5?
GPT-5.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 47.6 versus 21.7. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 mini or GPT-5.5?
GPT-5.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.6 versus 65.7. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, GPT-5.4 mini or GPT-5.5?
GPT-5.4 mini has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.6 versus 70.4. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.