| Signal | GPT-5 Nano | Delta | gpt-oss-120b |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | +33 | |
Benchmarks | 58 | -2 | |
Pricing | 0 | +0 | |
Context window size | 89 | +8 | |
Recency | 90 | +0 | |
Output Capacity | 85 | +65 | |
| Overall Result | 5 wins | of 6 | 1 wins |
9
days higher
6
days
15
days higher
OpenAI
OpenAI
gpt-oss-120b saves you $11.60/month
That's $139.20/year compared to GPT-5 Nano at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | GPT-5 Nano | gpt-oss-120b | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 62 | 62 | -- |
| Rank | #91 | #92 | GPT-5 Nano |
| Quality Rank | #91 | #92 | GPT-5 Nano |
| Adoption Rank | #91 | #92 | GPT-5 Nano |
| Parameters | -- | 120B | -- |
| Context Window | 400K | 131K | GPT-5 Nano |
| Pricing | $0.05/$0.40/M | $0.04/$0.19/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 67 | GPT-5 Nano |
| Benchmarks | 58 | 61 | gpt-oss-120b |
| Pricing | 0 | 0 | GPT-5 Nano |
| Context window size | 89 | 81 | GPT-5 Nano |
| Recency | 90 | 89 | GPT-5 Nano |
| Output Capacity | 85 | 20 | GPT-5 Nano |
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%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 62/100 (rank #91), placing it in the top 69% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 62/100 (rank #92), placing it in the top 69% of all 290 models tracked.
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.
gpt-oss-120b offers 49% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $3.44/month with gpt-oss-120b vs $6.75/month with GPT-5 Nano - a $3.31 monthly difference.
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.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. gpt-oss-120b also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (400K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.19/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (62/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
GPT-5 Nano and gpt-oss-120b 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.
Best for Quality
GPT-5 Nano
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
gpt-oss-120b
49% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
GPT-5 Nano
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
GPT-5 Nano
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
GPT-5 Nano
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
| Capability | GPT-5 Nano | gpt-oss-120b |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
OpenAI
gpt-oss-120b saves you $0.2718/month
That's 48% cheaper than GPT-5 Nano 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.
| Parameter | GPT-5 Nano | gpt-oss-120b |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 400K | 131K |
| Max Output Tokens | 128,000 | -- |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Aug 7, 2025 | Aug 5, 2025 |
Both GPT-5 Nano and gpt-oss-120b score 62/100, making them extremely close competitors. Choose based on pricing, provider ecosystem, or specific capability requirements.
GPT-5 Nano is ranked #91 and gpt-oss-120b is ranked #92 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
gpt-oss-120b is cheaper at $0.19/M output tokens vs GPT-5 Nano's $0.40/M output tokens - 2.1x more expensive. Input token pricing: GPT-5 Nano at $0.05/M vs gpt-oss-120b at $0.04/M.
GPT-5 Nano has a larger context window of 400,000 tokens compared to gpt-oss-120b's 131,072 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.