+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
GPT-3.5 Turbo vs GPT-4 Turbo
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
GPT-4 Turbo leads with 21.8% higher average benchmark score. GPT-4 Turbo offers 111.6K more tokens in context window than GPT-3.5 Turbo. GPT-3.5 Turbo is $38.00 cheaper per million tokens. Overall, GPT-4 Turbo is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
OpenAI
GPT-3.5 Turbo was developed as an optimized version of GPT-3.5, designed to provide a balance of capability and efficiency for conversational and completion tasks. Built to serve as a cost-effective option for applications requiring reliable language understanding and generation, it became widely adopted for chatbots, content generation, and general-purpose AI assistance.
+
+
+
+
OpenAI
GPT-4 Turbo was introduced as an optimized version of GPT-4, designed to provide enhanced performance with improved efficiency and an expanded context window. Built with updated knowledge and refined capabilities, it offered developers a more cost-effective way to leverage GPT-4's advanced reasoning while handling longer conversations and documents.
1 year newer
GPT-3.5 Turbo
OpenAI
2023-03-21
GPT-4 Turbo
OpenAI
2024-04-09
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Input:$0.50
Output:$1.50($38.00 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
GPT-4 Turbo
Input:$10.00
Output:$30.00
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 6 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Average Score:56.4%
+
+
+
+
GPT-4 Turbo
Average Score:78.1%(+21.8%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
GPT-3.5 Turbo
2021-09-30
GPT-4 Turbo
2023-12-31
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
GPT-3.5 Turbo
2 providers
Azure
Throughput: 90 tok/s
Latency: 0.8ms
OpenAI
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Avg Score:56.4%
Providers:2
+
+
+
+
GPT-4 Turbo
Avg Score:78.1%(+21.8%)
Providers:2