Coding · Head-to-head
GPT-5.5 vs Devin
GPT-5.5 (paid, AI Score 8.7/10) vs Devin (paid, AI Score 7.8/10). 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 7.8)
- →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.
Pick Devin if…
- →your primary use case is platform and infrastructure teams running repetitive multi-service work — framework upgrades, dependency migrations, test backfill — who want tasks delegated from jira or slack and returned as reviewable prs.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | GPT-5.5 | Devin |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | Core pay-as-you-go from $20; Team $500/mo; Enterprise custom — check site for current ACU rates |
| 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 | 7.8/10 |
| 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 infrastructure teams running repetitive multi-service work — framework upgrades, dependency migrations, test backfill — who want tasks delegated from Jira or Slack and returned as reviewable PRs. |
| Editor's pick | — | — |
| Use cases | development agents | development agents |
| 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- ×Superseded by the GPT-5.6 family in June 2026, including as the model behind Codex — this is prior-generation now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
Devin
Coding · paid
Pros
- ✓Usage-based entry tier removed the old $500/month floor, so a team can trial it for the price of a couple of tasks
- ✓Devin Wiki and Devin Search give grounded, citation-backed answers about large unfamiliar codebases
- ✓Parallel sessions and enterprise fan-out make repetitive migrations across many services genuinely tractable
- ✓Delegation from Slack, Linear, Jira and GitHub plus a public API fits existing workflows without an IDE switch
- ✓Full session replay of every shell command makes failures auditable rather than mysterious
Cons
- ×Consumption billing is hard to forecast — failed attempts and wrong turns bill the same as successful ones
- ×Competing async agents from Anthropic, OpenAI, Cursor and GitHub now ship in subscriptions costing a fraction as much
- ×Still needs tightly scoped tasks; ambiguous or architecture-level work produces confident PRs that get rejected
- ×No free tier, so evaluation always costs money
Related comparisons
Updated 2026-08-10. Spec data sourced from official product pages and tracked in our public directory at /tools.