Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
GPT-5 vs GPT-5.1
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GPT-5 wins on 11/17 benchmarks
GPT-5 wins 11 of 17 shared benchmarks. Leads in agentic · knowledge · math.
Category leads
agentic·GPT-5reasoning·GPT-5.1knowledge·GPT-5math·GPT-5coding·GPT-5.1
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
GPT-5
#74 by perf·no signal
GPT-5.1
#97 by perf·no signal
Best value
GPT-5
1.1x better value than GPT-5.1
GPT-5
9.7 pts/$
$5.63/M
GPT-5.1
8.8 pts/$
$5.63/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
17 benchmarks · 2 models
GPT-5GPT-5.1
APEX-Agents
GPT-5 leads by +0.8
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
GPT-5
18.3
GPT-5.1
17.5
ARC-AGI
GPT-5.1 leads by +7.1
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
GPT-5
65.7
GPT-5.1
72.8
ARC-AGI-2
GPT-5.1 leads by +7.8
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
9.9
GPT-5.1
17.6
Chess Puzzles
GPT-5 leads by +5.0
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
GPT-5
37.0
GPT-5.1
32.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5 leads by +1.4
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
GPT-5
32.4
GPT-5.1
31.0
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.
GPT-5
12.5
GPT-5.1
12.5
GPQA diamond
GPT-5.1 leads by +1.9
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
GPT-5
81.6
GPT-5.1
83.5
GSO-Bench
GPT-5.1 leads by +6.8
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
6.9
GPT-5.1
13.7
HLE
GPT-5 leads by +1.7
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
21.6
GPT-5.1
19.8
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5 leads by +2.8
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
GPT-5
91.4
GPT-5.1
88.6
SimpleBench
GPT-5 leads by +4.2
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
GPT-5
48.0
GPT-5.1
43.8
SimpleQA Verified
GPT-5 leads by +1.7
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
GPT-5
50.6
GPT-5.1
48.9
SWE-Bench verified
GPT-5 leads by +5.6
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
73.5
GPT-5.1
68.0
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only)
GPT-5.1 leads by +1.0
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
65.0
GPT-5.1
66.0
Terminal Bench
GPT-5 leads by +2.0
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
GPT-5
49.6
GPT-5.1
47.6
VPCT
GPT-5 leads by +11.0
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
GPT-5
49.0
GPT-5.1
38.0
WeirdML
GPT-5.1 leads by +0.1
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
GPT-5
60.7
GPT-5.1
60.8
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | GPT-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 18.3 | 17.5 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 65.7 | 72.8 |
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. | 9.9 | 17.6 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 37.0 | 32.0 |
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. | 32.4 | 31.0 |
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. | 12.5 | 12.5 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 81.6 | 83.5 |
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. | 6.9 | 13.7 |
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%. | 21.6 | 19.8 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 91.4 | 88.6 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 48.0 | 43.8 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 50.6 | 48.9 |
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. | 73.5 | 68.0 |
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. | 65.0 | 66.0 |
Terminal Bench Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence. | 49.6 | 47.6 |
VPCT VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations. | 49.0 | 38.0 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 60.7 | 60.8 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens