Skip to content

GPT-3.5 Turbo vs GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct

GPT-3.5 Turbo

OpenAI

40#362
vs
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalGPT-3.5 TurboDeltaGPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
Capabilities
50
+17
33
Pricing
99
+1
98
Context window size
67
+10
57
Recency
0
--
0
Output Capacity
60
--
60
Overall Result
3 wins
of 5
0 wins
GPT-3.5 Turbo wins 3 of 5 signals

Score History

Score History (25 data points)
GPT-3.5 TurboGPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
GPT-3.5 Turbo

40

current score

Leader

Tied

right now

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct

40

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

GPT-3.5 Turbo

OpenAI

Best Value
Per request$0.001250
Daily$4.17
Monthly$125.00
Annual$1500.00

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct

OpenAI

Per request$0.002500
Daily$8.33
Monthly$250.00
Annual$3000.00

GPT-3.5 Turbo saves you $125.00/month

That's $1500.00/year compared to GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

50% cheaper
Choose GPT-3.5 Turbo for cost optimization

GPT-3.5 Turbo pricing:
Input:$0.50/M tokens
Output:$1.50/M tokens
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct pricing:
Input:$1.50/M tokens
Output:$2.00/M tokens
Tie
GPT-3.5 Turbo

OpenAI

40

Composite Score

Tie
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct

OpenAI

40

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricGPT-3.5 TurboGPT-3.5 Turbo InstructWinner
Overall Score
40
40
--
Rank#362#360
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
Quality Rank#362#360
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
Adoption Rank#362#360
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
Parameters------
Context Window16K4K
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Pricing$0.50/$1.50/M$1.50/$2.00/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
50
33
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Pricing
99
98
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Context window size
67
57
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Recency
0
0
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Output Capacity
60
60
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

GPT-3.5 TurboEntry Level

Scores 40/100 (rank #362), placing it in the top -24% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
GPT-3.5 Turbo InstructEntry Level

Scores 40/100 (rank #360), placing it in the top -24% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose GPT-3.5 Turbo when you need:

  • Agentic applications using tool/function calling

Choose GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct when you need:

  • Budget-friendly applications with moderate quality requirements
Cost-Performance Analysis
GPT-3.5 TurboBest Value
Input cost$0.50/M tokens
Output cost$1.50/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.050
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$30.00
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
Input cost$1.50/M tokens
Output cost$2.00/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.087
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$52.50

GPT-3.5 Turbo offers 43% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $30.00/month with GPT-3.5 Turbo vs $52.50/month with GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct - a $22.50 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
GPT-3.5 TurboFaster
Speed score0/100
GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

GPT-3.5 Turbo

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. GPT-3.5 Turbo also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

GPT-3.5 Turbo

Long document analysis

Larger context window (16K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

GPT-3.5 Turbo

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($1.50/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

GPT-3.5 Turbo

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (40/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

GPT-3.5 Turbo
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
GPT-3.5 Turbo

GPT-3.5 Turbo and GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

GPT-3.5 Turbo
Recommended

by OpenAI

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 43% lower pricing; better value at scale
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by OpenAI

Consider for specialized use cases.

Capability Comparison
CapabilityGPT-3.5 TurboGPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
Vision (Image Input)
Function Callingdiffers
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

GPT-3.5 Turbo

OpenAI

Best Value
$2.70
estimated monthly cost

GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct

OpenAI

$5.10
estimated monthly cost

GPT-3.5 Turbo saves you $2.40/month

That's 47% cheaper than GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterGPT-3.5 TurboGPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct
Context Window16K4K
Max Output Tokens4,0964,096
Open SourceNoNo
CreatedMay 28, 2023Sep 28, 2023
Last updated: 37m ago

相关对比

GPT-3.5 Turbo vs GPT-3.5 Turbo Instruct (2026) | LM Market Cap