whatmodel.sh / GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613)

GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) is a closed-weights language model from OpenAI, released June 2023. Licence: proprietary.

Catalogue identity notes

Comparison-only. Dated API snapshot gpt-3.5-turbo-0613 (4K context; not gpt-3.5-turbo-16k-0613). OpenAI's deprecations page lists its shutdown on 2024-09-13, so no current API. Release month from the snapshot date in the model name.

45.6±0.8comparison only: no current run option verifiedfrom 16 benchmark results across 9 sources

$ how it compares

The LLMs ranked either side of GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613), out of 828 with a score, then more from OpenAI.

#modelscorewhereRAMreleased
512Gemini 1.0 Pro (001) Google46±2comparison only2023-12
513Mistral Medium (2312) Mistral46±1comparison only2023-12
514GPT-3.5 Turbo (0613) OpenAI46±1comparison only2023-06
515Granite 3.3 8B Instruct IBM46±1local~6.3GB2025-04
516Tulu 2 70B Allen Institute for AI46±2local~28GB2023-11
more from OpenAI
1GPT-6 Astra OpenAI87±1api $20.00/M2026-09
3GPT-6.1 Sol OpenAI85±1api $4.00/M2026-09
7GPT-6 Sol OpenAI83±1api $4.00/M2026-09

see all LLMs · find the ones that fit your machine

$ what it's good at

coding▁▁▁▃▅▇█▇▅▄▃▁ #324 of 524 · 18% of its score · 4 tests

Beats Qwen3-VL 32B Instruct, Solar Open 100B (102B-A12B), GLM-4.7-Flash here, though they rank higher overall. Trails DeepSeek LLM 67B Chat, Mistral NeMo Instruct (2407), QwQ-32B-Preview here, though they rank lower overall.

testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
Aider code editing (133 Exercism Python exercises, two attempts)50.4% ✎▁·▁▂▄▁▆▄█▆▂▂ beats 14/62medium · avg 54%▇▇▇▇ 11%at its level
Tulu 2: CodexEval pass@1088.0% ✎▃▃▃·▆▃▃█▃▂▂▅ beats 24/25very easy · avg 86%▇ 3.3%sharp
CRUXEval-I49.0% ✎▁··▁▅▂█▇▃··▁ beats 21/22medium · avg 54%▇ 2.3%at its level
CRUXEval-O49.4% ✎▁·▂▃▁█▁▃···▁ beats 20/22medium · avg 53%▇ 2.2%blunt · at its level
chat & writing▁▁▁▃▅▄▆█▇▇▇▃ #352 of 463 · 45% of its score · 4 tests

Beats Ministral 3 14B Reasoning 2512, Gemma 4 E4B, OpenThinker3 7B here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Flan-T5 XXL, LFM2 700M, EXAONE 3.5 2.4B Instruct here, though they rank lower overall.

testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
AlpacaEval 2 length-controlled22.4% ✎▁▂▂▃▆▆█▆▄▄▁▁ beats 57/122medium · avg 39%▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 20%at its level
Arena-Hard (v0.1, GPT-4-1106 judge)24.8% ✎▂▁▁▅█▅▄▃▃▅▃▁ beats 24/60medium · avg 52%▇▇▇▇▇▇ 14%sharp · at its level
Polyrating rating (bias-aware re-fit of Chatbot Arena votes, mid-2024)1161.0 ✎▂▁▂▁▃▇█▆▇▄▂▂ beats 70/95avg 1201▇▇ 5.7%blunt
MT-Bench (GPT-4 single-answer grading, LMSYS runs)8.3900 MT-Bench score (1-10) ✎▆▂▂▆▆▄██▂▄▄▆ beats 25/28avg 8.819 MT-Bench score (1-10)▇▇ 5.0%sharp · noisy
math▁▂▃▅▇▅▅█▄▁▁▁ #250 of 462 * · 2.9% of its score · 1 test

Beats GPT-4o (2024-08-06), Command A (03-2025), GPT-4o (2024-11-20) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Olmo 3 7B Instruct here, though they rank lower overall.

testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
GSM8K76.5% ✎▆▂▅█▅▅▃▆···▂ beats 24/25easy · avg 73%▇ 2.9%sharp · at its level
other tests7 not in a task · 33% of its score
testresultvs the others in its rundifficultycountswhy
BIG-Bench Hard70.8% ✎▁·····▂█▂▅·▁ beats 24/25easy · avg 77%▇▇▇▇ 9.3%sharp · at its level
CLIcK Korean (Daekeun Kim)51.0% ✎▆▄▄▄█▄▂·▄█·▄ beats 3/23medium · avg 58%▇▇▇ 8.4%at its level
HAE-RAE 1.0 (Daekeun Kim)52.7% ✎▄▄▄▂▂█▂▄▂█▂▄ beats 2/22medium · avg 63%▇▇▇ 7.6%at its level
MMLU65.7% ✎▁▁▃▃▄█▄▁█··▁ beats 21/25easy · avg 74%▇ 3.4%at its level
EQ-Bench v1 (60 questions, paper run)49.2% ✎▂··▄·▂▆▄▂█·▂ beats 10/14medium · avg 57%▇ 2.6%at its level
Tulu 2: TyDiQA gold passage, 1-shot F151.2% ✎▂··▁▃▂▂▂█▅▁▂ beats 13/25medium · avg 61%▇ 1.0%blunt · at its level
KMMLU-HARD (Daekeun Kim, zero-shot)21.0% ✎█···▁▁▁▂▃·▆▂ beats 0/23very hard · avg 29%▇ 1.0%sharp · too hard for it

$ where to run it

No verified API or download recorded yet · add one

$ how the score was worked out · AlpacaEval 1.0 and 2.0 leader… 20%, Tulu 2 — base and instruction… 20%, Daekeun Kim Korean LLM benchm… 17% and 6 more

Each result implies a score on its own, after adjusting for how hard its test is and who ran it. The score is their weighted average, with a small pull toward the middle for thinly tested models. Each test's weight is its counts column above; here it's added up by who ran the tests. How it works

$ improve this page

Use a short GitHub form or edit the data through a pull request. Every number needs a source; here's which ones we can use.

data updated · sources and licences · json