GPT-5.5-ProvsComposer 2.5
GPT-5.5-Pro | Composer 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 36% | — |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 54% |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 79.8% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.2Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor, on the refreshed v3.2 task set. Scores aren't comparable with v3.1. Higher is better. | — | 56.1% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | — | 63.2% |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.0Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | — | 18% |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 83% | 92%Best |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 73% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 69.3% |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 90.1% | — |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 57.2% | — |
Advanced math FrontierMath · Tier 1–3Very hard, research-level math problems. Tiers 1–3 are the (still extremely difficult) lower tiers. Higher is better. | 52.4% | — |
Advanced math FrontierMath · Tier 4Very hard, research-level math problems. Tier 4 is the hardest — close to what professional research mathematicians tackle. Higher is better. | 39.6% | — |
Knowledge work GDPval (win/tie rate)How often the AI's work matches or beats a human expert's on real knowledge-work tasks. Higher is better. | 82.3% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | OpenAI | SpaceXAI |
| Release date | Apr 23 2026 | May 18 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: GPT-5.5-Pro or Composer 2.5?
Composer 2.5 leads GPT-5.5-Pro on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Next.js Evals). GPT-5.5-Pro shipped 25 days before Composer 2.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On Next.js Evals, Composer 2.5 leads at 92% vs GPT-5.5-Pro at 83%.
Frequently asked questions
GPT-5.5-Pro was released by OpenAI on Apr 23 2026.
Composer 2.5 was released by SpaceXAI on May 18 2026.
Composer 2.5 leads on Next.js Evals — GPT-5.5-Pro 83% vs Composer 2.5 92%.
Other comparisons
GPT-5.5-ProvsClaude Opus 5Composer 2.5vsClaude Opus 5GPT-5.5-ProvsGemini 3.7 FlashComposer 2.5vsGemini 3.7 FlashGPT-5.5-ProvsMuse GlimmerComposer 2.5vsMuse GlimmerGPT-5.5-ProvsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Composer 2.5vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813GPT-5.5-ProvsMistral Medium 3.5Composer 2.5vsMistral Medium 3.5GPT-5.5-ProvsKimi K3Composer 2.5vsKimi K3