Coding · Head-to-head
GPT-5.5 vs Cody
GPT-5.5 (paid, AI Score 8.7/10) vs Cody (paid, AI Score 6.4/10). Side-by-side pricing, features, pros and cons, and which to pick.
The verdict
Pick GPT-5.5 if…
- →you need a genuinely free option
- →overall capability matters more than price (AI Score 8.7 vs 6.4)
- →your primary use case is teams already running gpt-5.5 in production who want a generally-available, independently benchmarked frontier model rather than switching a working stack to a newer gated preview.
- →you need: agents
Pick Cody if…
- →your primary use case is platform and developer-experience teams at large organisations already running sourcegraph, who need repo-wide ai answers under their own permission model and cloud-hosted inference.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | GPT-5.5 | Cody |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Coding | Coding |
| Pricing model | paid | paid |
| Headline pricing | API: $5/$30 per 1M tokens (in/out) as last published. ChatGPT Plus $20/mo, Pro $200/mo | Enterprise only — check website for current pricing |
| Free tier | No free API tier. ChatGPT's free plan does not include GPT-5.5; free traffic routes to smaller models. | — |
| AI Score | 8.7/10 | 6.4/10 |
| Best for | Teams already running GPT-5.5 in production who want a generally-available, independently benchmarked frontier model rather than switching a working stack to a newer gated preview. | Platform and developer-experience teams at large organisations already running Sourcegraph, who need repo-wide AI answers under their own permission model and cloud-hosted inference. |
| Editor's pick | — | — |
| Use cases | development agents | development |
| Date added | 2026-05-02 | 2026-05-01 |
Pros and cons
GPT-5.5
Coding · paid
Pros
- ✓Generally available and independently benchmarked, with months of production track record behind it
- ✓Genuine agentic capability: tool use, self-correction and multi-step task completion, not just single-turn answers
- ✓272K context still handles most whole-codebase and long-document work without chunking
- ✓Mini and nano tiers let you route cheap calls without leaving OpenAI
Cons
- ×Superseded by the GPT-5.6 family in June 2026, including as the model behind Codex — this is prior-generation now
- ×Still carries flagship pricing at $5/$30 while GPT-5.6 Terra ($2.50/$15) and Kimi K3 ($3/$15) target similar work for less
- ×272K context now trails the 1M-token windows on Gemini 3.5 Pro and Kimi K3
- ×Closed weights with no self-hosting path, so migration cost is entirely OpenAI's to price
Cody
Coding · paid
Pros
- ✓Context comes from a real code-search index rather than a bolted-on vector store, so cross-repository answers cite actual definitions and references
- ✓Model routing through Amazon Bedrock or Azure OpenAI keeps inference inside your own cloud account — a hard requirement in regulated environments
- ✓Inherits Sourcegraph repository permissions, so it cannot surface code a user isn't cleared to see
- ✓Self-hosted and air-gapped deployment options that most AI coding assistants simply do not offer
- ✓Adds AI on top of an installation many large engineering orgs already run, rather than introducing a new vendor
Cons
- ×The self-serve Free and Pro tiers were retired in 2025 — individual developers can no longer buy this, which is a major change from earlier reviews
- ×Sourcegraph's agentic coding investment moved to Amp, so Cody no longer receives the company's headline feature work
- ×No autonomous multi-file agent loop comparable to Cursor, Claude Code, or Sourcegraph's own Amp
- ×Requires a Sourcegraph deployment and index before it delivers its one differentiator — a heavy prerequisite if you aren't already a customer
Related comparisons
Updated 2026-08-10. Spec data sourced from official product pages and tracked in our public directory at /tools.