Model comparison
Exaone 4.0 32B vs GPT-5.6 Sol
Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Exaone 4.0 32B #170 (Estimated); GPT-5.6 Sol #3 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Exaone 4.0 32B and GPT-5.6 Sol share 11 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Exaone 4.0 32B; 35 to GPT-5.6 Sol.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 11
- Exaone 4.0 32B only
- 2
- GPT-5.6 Sol only
- 35
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GPT-5.6 Sol if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Exaone 4.0 32B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.6 Sol is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 81.96 to 40.44. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.6 Sol's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 94.6 against 81.8.
GPT-5.6 Sol gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Exaone 4.0 32B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Exaone 4.0 32B | Δ | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Exaone 4.0 32B81.8 | Margin→ 12.8 | GPT-5.6 Sol94.6 |
| Agentic | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.6 Sol92.0 |
| Coding | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.6 Sol64.6 |
| Math | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.6 Sol87.5 |
| Multimodal | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.6 Sol83.0 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Exaone 4.0 32B | GPT-5.6 Sol | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | GPT-5.6 Sol$5 input / $30 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Exaone 4.0 32B128K | GPT-5.6 Sol1M | GPT-5.6 Sol lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 4.1% | 85.1% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 91.9% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 92.2% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 62.6% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 84.5% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 33.7% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 58% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 54.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 61.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1736 | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1501 | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 56.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 33.0% | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 51.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 87.2% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 65.9% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 88% | Not comparable |
Coding8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-SciCodeSource | 25.2% | 56.1% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 64.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 91.9% | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | — | 72.7% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | — | 60.6% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 67.2% | Not comparable |
| VulcanBench v3Source | — | 87.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 77.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.6 Sol wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 6.0% | 58.9% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 62.8% | 94.1% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-HLESource | 4.9% | 47.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -62.3% | 21.7% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 10.4% | 58.5% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 81.0% | 88.8% | Exaone 4.0 32B leads |
| GPQASource | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | — | 60.5% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 33.1% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 33.5% | 72.7% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Exaone 4.0 32B or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 81.96 to 40.44.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Exaone 4.0 32B or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 94.6 versus 81.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.