Celeris-1 vs GPT-5.5 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Celeris-1 by Celeris or GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) scores 32.1 points higher (38.4 vs 6.3) but costs 88× as much to run the benchmark ($5294 vs $60.0; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 6.3, and Celeris-1 when 6.3 is enough.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 6.3 | 38.4 | +509.5% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 6.1× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $59.99 | $5,294.36 | +8725.4% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 88× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 0.87s | 44.76s | +5044.8% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 5044.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $0.70 | $5.00 / $30.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) vs Celeris-1: 509.5% more intelligence, 8725.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 5044.8% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Celeris-1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Medium) scores 34.50 for $56.4.
- GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Celeris-1GPT-5.5 (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/celeris-1/gpt-5-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/celeris-1/gpt-5-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill