Model comparison
GPT-5.5 vs Holo3-122B-A10B
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.5 #9 (Estimated); Holo3-122B-A10B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.5 and Holo3-122B-A10B share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 56 results are unique to GPT-5.5; 0 to Holo3-122B-A10B.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- GPT-5.5 only
- 56
- Holo3-122B-A10B only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. GPT-5.5 makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; Holo3-122B-A10B is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 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-5.5 and Holo3-122B-A10B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
GPT-5.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens for Holo3-122B-A10B. That is roughly 10.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-122B-A10B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-5.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-122B-A10B.
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-5.5 | Δ | Holo3-122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | GPT-5.581.6 | Margin← 2.7 | Holo3-122B-A10B78.9 |
| Coding | GPT-5.558.6 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-122B-A10BNot measured |
| Reasoning | GPT-5.585.0 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-122B-A10BNot measured |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.557.8 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-122B-A10BNot measured |
| Math | GPT-5.547.6 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-122B-A10BNot measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.570.4 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-122B-A10BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 78.7%B 78.8%Winner: Holo3-122B-A10BΔ 0.1OSWorld-Verified: GPT-5.5 scored 78.7%; Holo3-122B-A10B scored 78.8%. Holo3-122B-A10B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.5$5 input / $30 output | Holo3-122B-A10B$0.4 input / $3 output | Holo3-122B-A10B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.5Not available | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.5Not available | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.51M | Holo3-122B-A10B64K | GPT-5.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.5 wins24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 82% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 78.7% | 78.8% | Holo3-122B-A10B leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 75.3% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 55.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 93.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 44.9% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 37.7% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 49.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1490 | — | 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-5.5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 58.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 82.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 69.85% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 84.7% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | 59.2% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 58.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 74.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 56.1% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 43.0% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 93.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 93.6% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 52.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 41.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 54.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 93.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 44.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 20.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 56.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 85.5% | — | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 75.9% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-5.5 or Holo3-122B-A10B?
GPT-5.5 and Holo3-122B-A10B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.5 or Holo3-122B-A10B?
GPT-5.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.6 versus 78.9. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified 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.