CL-SN55 941 —
GPT-56T 861 —
GPT-6S 837 —
GPT-56SC 837 +8.6%
CL-OP55X 831 +8.8%
GROK-46H 831 +8.8%
DSK-V4PH 831 +8.8%
GLM-52 822 +3.9%
GPT-61S 818 —
MUSE-SPK 804 -3.9%
CL-FAB5H 749 +9.8%
GLM-5 749 -3.9%
CL-OP5H 724 +10.2%
CL-OP5X 722 +10.2%
QWEN-38X 722 -3.9%
GEM-37FH 720 +10.3%
KIMI-K3X 718 -3.6%
CL-OP46H 707 +10.5%
CL-OP55H 705 +10.5%
GPT-6A 704 -5.1%
CL-OP47H 696 +10.7%
GEM-38FH 687 -3.5%
GEM-36FH 647 +11.6%
CL-OP48H 644 +11.6%
GEM-35FH 630 +11.9%
GPT-55H 588 +12.6%
GPT-56S 586 -0.5%
CL-OP47 550 -0.5%
INKL 531 —
GEM-3P 495 —
CL-OP46 491 -0.2%
GEM-31P 489 -2%
CL-OP48 485 —
GPT-6L 436 —
GPT-55 398 -2%
CL-SN55 941 —
GPT-56T 861 —
GPT-6S 837 —
GPT-56SC 837 +8.6%
CL-OP55X 831 +8.8%
GROK-46H 831 +8.8%
DSK-V4PH 831 +8.8%
GLM-52 822 +3.9%
GPT-61S 818 —
MUSE-SPK 804 -3.9%
CL-FAB5H 749 +9.8%
GLM-5 749 -3.9%
CL-OP5H 724 +10.2%
CL-OP5X 722 +10.2%
QWEN-38X 722 -3.9%
GEM-37FH 720 +10.3%
KIMI-K3X 718 -3.6%
CL-OP46H 707 +10.5%
CL-OP55H 705 +10.5%
GPT-6A 704 -5.1%
CL-OP47H 696 +10.7%
GEM-38FH 687 -3.5%
GEM-36FH 647 +11.6%
CL-OP48H 644 +11.6%
GEM-35FH 630 +11.9%
GPT-55H 588 +12.6%
GPT-56S 586 -0.5%
CL-OP47 550 -0.5%
INKL 531 —
GEM-3P 495 —
CL-OP46 491 -0.2%
GEM-31P 489 -2%
CL-OP48 485 —
GPT-6L 436 —
GPT-55 398 -2%
← Back to feed

GPT-5.5 Costs 49-92% More in Practice — OpenRouter's Switcher Cohort Study Breaks Down the Real Price

OpenAI’s sticker price for GPT-5.5 is double GPT-5.4: $5/M input and $30/M output, up from $2.50 and $15. The company argued the model is less verbose, keeping net costs closer to flat. OpenRouter ran the numbers on users who actually switched and found the reality is messier.

The Methodology

OpenRouter identified a “switcher cohort” — users whose top model by request count was GPT-5.4 before the launch, who then moved to GPT-5.5 as their primary model. They tracked the same users across the same workflows before and after, normalising to cost per million OpenRouter tokens to control for prompt length variation. GPT-5.4 and 5.5 share a tokenizer family, so no tokenizer correction was needed.

Verbosity: Only Cuts Long-Context Prompts

GPT-5.5 does produce shorter completions — but only when the input is long:

Prompt SizeGPT-5.4 Median CompletionGPT-5.5 Median CompletionChange
< 2K tokens121129+7%
2K – 10K140213+52%
10K – 25K211143-32%
25K – 50K185150-19%
50K – 128K188136-28%
128K+215143-34%

Under 10K tokens, the model is actually more verbose than its predecessor. The efficiency gains OpenAI cited apply to the long-context use case only. Short prompt users, who make up the majority of API calls by count, see no offset.

Actual Cost Impact

Prompt SizeGPT-5.4 Avg $/MGPT-5.5 Avg $/MIncrease
< 2K tokens$4.89$9.37+92%
2K – 10K$2.25$3.81+69%
10K – 25K$1.42$2.15+51%
25K – 50K$1.02$1.65+62%
50K – 128K$0.74$1.10+49%
128K+$0.71$1.31+85%

The cheapest case is 50K-128K tokens at +49%. Short-context developers see costs nearly double. Heavy-context developers — the segment most likely to benefit from reduced verbosity — still absorb 49-62% increases.

Context

OpenRouter ran the same analysis on Opus 4.7 earlier. That study found a 27% net cost increase over Opus 4.6 in the agentic sweet spot. GPT-5.5 lands at a steeper premium in every bucket. For cost-sensitive deployments that can tolerate slightly lower capability, GPT-5.4 and DeepSeek V4 remain the incumbents. For teams that have already moved to 5.5, the data suggests auditing prompt lengths first — the savings narrative only holds for long-context heavy users.

OpenAI noted separately that GPT-5.5 scores 82.7% on Terminal-Bench 2.0 and 88.7% on SWE-Bench Verified, ahead of every other model. Whether the performance delta justifies 49-92% higher operating costs depends entirely on the task.