\n\n Model<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n\n Strengths<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n\n Weaknesses<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n\n Status<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n\n Speed (Latency)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n\n GPT-3.5<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Fast and efficient for basic conversations and simple tasks<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Lower reasoning ability, outdated knowledge base<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Available<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Fast<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n\n GPT-4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Balanced performance, suitable for general use<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Less specialized than newer variants<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Available<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Moderate<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n\n o1<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n First true reasoning model, excels at complex logic and science<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Slower response time, limited availability<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Available<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Slower<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n\n GPT-4.1 Series<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Improved coding performance, faster inference<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Not available in ChatGPT yet (API only)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n New<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Fast (Nano), Moderate (Mini), Slower (Full)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n\n o3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Most powerful model currently available, excels at math and reasoning<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n High cost, resource-intensive<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n New<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Slower<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n\n 04-mini<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Efficient reasoning model, strong in STEM benchmarks<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Less creative, less suitable for casual chats<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n New<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Moderate<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | \n\n (Phased out) GPT-4.5 Orion<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Strong writing capabilities, more human-like tone<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Higher cost, not ideal for logic or coding<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Phased out April 30, 2025<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Moderate<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n Best for Scientific and Mathematical Reasoning: o3<\/h3>\nOpenAI\u2019s o3 model is a powerhouse for deep scientific and mathematical reasoning, especially when paired with external tools. o3 with Python scored 99.5% on competition math in a test \u2014 it\u2019s basically acing it.<\/p>\n It also outperforms other models in graduate-level science questions and complex logical reasoning. When you think about models that could deliver scientific discoveries in the not-too-distant future, this is it.<\/p>\n Best for Coding: GPT-4.1 Full and o3<\/h3>\nFor coding, there are a few different options that perform well. GPT-4.1 Full was explicitly designed for coding and following instructions, showing strong performance in coding benchmarks. GPT4.1 is actually a smarter model than GPT4.5. So even though the numbering scheme went backwards, it’s a more powerful model than 4.5 was.<\/p>\n For a while, o1 was OpenAI\u2019s top dog model, the best of the best, but now that\u2019s been dethroned by o3. o3 is excellent for complex logic and reasoning tasks, making it ideal for debugging and solving advanced programming problems.<\/p>\n Best for Writing, Creativity, and General Use: GPT-4<\/h3>\nGPT-4 is OpenAI\u2019s default model within ChatGPT, so if you\u2019ve just dabbled with the free version, that\u2019s likely what you used. GPT-4.5 was my go-to for creativity and was the best OpenAI model I\u2019ve seen for human-like writing, but unfortunately, that\u2019s no longer available.<\/p>\n That power should translate into GPT-5, but until that\u2019s available, GPT-4 is the next best for writing, creativity, and general use.<\/p>\n Best Value: GPT-4.1 Nano<\/h3>\nGPT-4.1 Nano is a small, fast model with surprisingly good performance. That\u2019s ideal for quick tasks where high-end power isn\u2019t needed. It boasts a one-million token context window. If you want access to the superpower of 4.0 but don\u2019t want to spring $200 a month or more for Pro, try Nano.<\/p>\n How OpenAI\u2019s Models Compare to Outside Models<\/h2>\nOpenAI no longer releases its performance data side-by-side with competitors, but it\u2019s worth examining. For example, Google\u2019s Gemini 2.5 Pro recently made headlines for its impressive coding capabilities, surpassing expectations. Google has quietly taken the lead in AI coding in 2025, and people haven\u2019t been talking about it enough.<\/p>\n Claude 3.7 from Anthropic also shows promise but has struggled with consistency compared to earlier versions. OpenAI\u2019s o3 model outperforms Claude 3.7 in math and reasoning benchmarks.<\/p>\n While OpenAI leads in some areas, such as multimodal understanding and reasoning, the gap between top-tier models is narrowing. Developers should evaluate models based on specific use cases rather than by company alone.<\/p>\n | | | | | |