Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
GPT-5.1 vs o3
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GPT-5.1 wins on 19/26 benchmarks
GPT-5.1 wins 19 of 26 shared benchmarks. Leads in agentic · reasoning · general.
Category leads
agentic·GPT-5.1reasoning·GPT-5.1knowledge·o3general·GPT-5.1math·GPT-5.1coding·GPT-5.1language·GPT-5.1
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
GPT-5.1
#138 by perf·#4 by attention
o3
#111 by perf·no signal
Best value
o3
1.2x better value than GPT-5.1
GPT-5.1
8.6 pts/$
$5.63/M
o3
10.2 pts/$
$5.00/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
26 benchmarks · 2 models
GPT-5.1o3
APEX-Agents
GPT-5.1 leads by +0.3
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
GPT-5.1
17.5
o3
17.2
ARC-AGI
GPT-5.1 leads by +12.0
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
GPT-5.1
72.8
o3
60.8
ARC-AGI-2
GPT-5.1 leads by +11.1
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
GPT-5.1
17.6
o3
6.5
Chess Puzzles
o3 leads by +6.3
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
GPT-5.1
28.4
o3
34.8
Cl Bench
GPT-5.1 leads by +5.9
GPT-5.1
23.7
o3
17.8
DeepResearch Bench
o3 leads by +2.4
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
GPT-5.1
42.8
o3
45.2
Dtbench
GPT-5.1 leads by +8.9
GPT-5.1
83.5
o3
74.7
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5.1 leads by +35.8
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
GPT-5.1
54.5
o3
18.7
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
GPT-5.1 leads by +17.4
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
GPT-5.1
20.8
o3
3.5
GPQA diamond
GPT-5.1 leads by +7.7
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
GPT-5.1
83.5
o3
75.8
GSO-Bench
GPT-5.1 leads by +4.9
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
GPT-5.1
13.7
o3
8.8
HELM · GPQA
o3 leads by +31.1
GPT-5.1
44.2
o3
75.3
HELM · IFEval
GPT-5.1 leads by +6.6
GPT-5.1
93.5
o3
86.9
HELM · MMLU-Pro
o3 leads by +28.0
GPT-5.1
57.9
o3
85.9
HELM · Omni-MATH
o3 leads by +25.0
GPT-5.1
46.4
o3
71.4
HELM · WildBench
GPT-5.1 leads by +0.2
GPT-5.1
86.3
o3
86.1
HLE
GPT-5.1 leads by +3.5
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
GPT-5.1
19.8
o3
16.3
Lmca
GPT-5.1 leads by +4.9
GPT-5.1
51.6
o3
46.7
Mystery Game Puzzles
o3 leads by +11.0
GPT-5.1
10.8
o3
21.8
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5.1 leads by +4.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
GPT-5.1
88.6
o3
84.4
SimpleBench
GPT-5.1 leads by +0.1
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
GPT-5.1
43.8
o3
43.7
SimpleQA Verified
o3 leads by +1.4
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
GPT-5.1
48.0
o3
49.4
SWE-Bench verified
GPT-5.1 leads by +5.7
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
GPT-5.1
68.0
o3
62.3
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only)
GPT-5.1 leads by +7.6
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only) · a curated subset of SWE-bench where models fix real Python repository bugs using only bash commands, no agent frameworks.
GPT-5.1
66.0
o3
58.4
VPCT
GPT-5.1 leads by +10.0
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
GPT-5.1
38.0
o3
28.0
WeirdML
GPT-5.1 leads by +8.4
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
GPT-5.1
60.8
o3
52.4
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | o3 |
|---|---|---|
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 17.5 | 17.2 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 72.8 | 60.8 |
ARC-AGI-2 ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data. | 17.6 | 6.5 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 28.4 | 34.8 |
Cl Bench | 23.7 | 17.8 |
DeepResearch Bench DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses. | 42.8 | 45.2 |
Dtbench | 83.5 | 74.7 |
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning. | 54.5 | 18.7 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning. | 20.8 | 3.5 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 83.5 | 75.8 |
GSO-Bench GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues. | 13.7 | 8.8 |
HELM · GPQA | 44.2 | 75.3 |
HELM · IFEval | 93.5 | 86.9 |
HELM · MMLU-Pro | 57.9 | 85.9 |
HELM · Omni-MATH | 46.4 | 71.4 |
HELM · WildBench | 86.3 | 86.1 |
HLE HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%. | 19.8 | 16.3 |
Lmca | 51.6 | 46.7 |
Mystery Game Puzzles | 10.8 | 21.8 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 88.6 | 84.4 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 43.8 | 43.7 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 48.0 | 49.4 |
SWE-Bench verified SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability. | 68.0 | 62.3 |
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only) SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only) · a curated subset of SWE-bench where models fix real Python repository bugs using only bash commands, no agent frameworks. | 66.0 | 58.4 |
VPCT VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations. | 38.0 | 28.0 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 60.8 | 52.4 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens