Model comparison
GPT-5.5 vs Phi-4
Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.5 #9 (Estimated); Phi-4 #192 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.5 and Phi-4 share 11 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 46 results are unique to GPT-5.5; 0 to Phi-4.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 11
- GPT-5.5 only
- 46
- Phi-4 only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for GPT-5.5 and Phi-4 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
GPT-5.5 is priced at $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Phi-4. GPT-5.5 has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 16K for Phi-4.
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 | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | GPT-5.581.6 | MarginNo overlap | Phi-4Not measured |
| Coding | GPT-5.558.6 | MarginNo overlap | Phi-4Not measured |
| Reasoning | GPT-5.585.0 | MarginNo overlap | Phi-4Not measured |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.557.8 | MarginNo overlap | Phi-4Not measured |
| Math | GPT-5.547.6 | MarginNo overlap | Phi-4Not measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.570.4 | MarginNo overlap | Phi-4Not measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.5 | Phi-4 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.5$5 input / $30 output | Phi-4$0 input / $0 output | Phi-4 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.5Not available | Phi-435 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.5Not available | Phi-42.02 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.51M | Phi-416K | GPT-5.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | Phi-4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 82% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 78.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 75.3% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 55.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 93.9% | 0% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| 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 | Phi-4 | 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% | 26.0% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 43.0% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | Phi-4 | 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% | 4.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 93.5% | 57.5% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 44.3% | 4.1% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 20.1% | -56.7% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 56.9% | 13.2% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 85.5% | 80.5% | Phi-4 leads |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | Phi-4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 75.9% | 23.5% | GPT-5.5 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare GPT-5.5 and Phi-4 on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for GPT-5.5 and Phi-4 today?
GPT-5.5: $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens Phi-4: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
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.