What Is GPT-5’s Real IQ Score? Here is The Truth

People are really confused about how smart GPT-5 actually is. Social media posts show IQ scores anywhere from 57 to 148 – that’s a huge 91-point difference that has users wondering what’s really going on. Some people are excited about GPT-5 Pro and call it a major step up. Others are writing off the whole thing after seeing terrible test results. This makes sense when you think about it – we’re talking about the difference between below average IQ and near-genius levels.

New testing shows that different versions of GPT-5 perform very differently from each other. The regular version scores between 94-120 IQ depending on which test you use. GPT-5 Pro hits 148 IQ on some tests. But figuring out why these scores are so different means we need to look at how these tests actually work.

This matters because these IQ measurements affect how we judge AI for real-world use. Whether that’s research projects or business decisions. The big gaps between different GPT-5 versions also make you wonder which one you should actually be using. And if what you’re getting is as smart as what’s being advertised.

Confusion About GPT-5’s IQ

The confusion surrounding GPT-5’s intelligence becomes immediately apparent when you scroll through social media discussions about the model’s performance. Users are sharing dramatically different IQ scores for what, to the average user, seems to be the same model. This is creating a chaotic view of conflicting information that leaves most people unsure about what they’re actually getting.

One widely circulated post shows GPT-5 scoring just 70 IQ on offline tests, with a modest improvement to 83 IQ when vision capabilities are included. This ranking places GPT-5 significantly below competitors like Claude Opus 4 at 118 IQ and even OpenAI‘s own o3 Pro at 116 IQ. For users seeing this data, GPT-5 appears to be a disappointing step backward rather than the revolutionary advancement OpenAI promised.

Meanwhile, other users are sharing completely different results, with posts claiming GPT-5 Pro achieves an impressive 148 IQ score. The excitement in these posts seems quite overexaggerated, with users comparing the experience to “feeling the AGI” and requesting that OpenAI give Plus subscribers access to this seemingly superior version. A 148 IQ score would place GPT-5 Pro in the near-genius category, representing a massive step forward in AI capabilities.

Adding to the confusion, posts about GPT-5 Thinking show yet another disappointing result – a mere 57 IQ score with a success rate of just 13% on reasoning tasks. Users responding to these results express frustration and disappointment, with sarcastic comments like “pack it up guys” reflecting the sentiment that this version of GPT-5 is essentially unusable for serious cognitive tasks.

For the average user seeing these posts, it’s obvious how confusing this can become: Which score represents the real GPT-5? How do I find out what it’s real IQ is? The 91-point difference between the lowest and highest reported scores creates genuine uncertainty about what level of intelligence they can expect from OpenAI’s latest model, and whether the version they’re accessing matches any of these measurements.

GPT-5’s Real IQ

Current official evaluations reveal that the confusion surrounding GPT-5’s intelligence stems from the existence of multiple distinct model variants, each demonstrating significantly different cognitive capabilities. These aren’t marketing gimmicks or user perception differences, they are actual performance gaps between OpenAI’s different GPT-5 implementations.

GPT-5 (Standard Version) achieves an IQ score of 94 on offline testing and 120 on the Mensa Norway test. This is the baseline GPT-5 model that most users have through standard ChatGPT access. The 26-point difference between testing methodologies reflects consistent patterns seen across multiple AI evaluations, though the reasons behind this variance need deeper examination of the testing approaches.

GPT-5 Thinking demonstrates lower performance with an IQ of 81 on offline tests and 96 on Mensa Norway evaluations. Despite its name suggesting better reasoning capabilities, this variant consistently underperforms compared to the standard GPT-5 model across both testing methods. The 15-point gap between Thinking and standard GPT-5 on Mensa Norway tests indicates fairly substantial differences in cognitive processing.

GPT-5 Pro is by far the highest-performing variant, scoring 116 IQ on offline tests and an impressive 148 on Mensa Norway evaluations. The Pro version achieves near-genius level intelligence on certain assessments, explaining why users with access to this model report quite different experiences compared to those using the other 2 variants.

The data reveals consistent patterns across all variants: Mensa Norway scores exceed offline test results by 15-32 points, and there’s a clear performance hierarchy with Pro outperforming Standard, which in turn outperforms Thinking across both testing methodologies.

How is AI’s IQ Measured

To understand why GPT-5 shows such different IQ scores we have to look at how these tests actually work. There are two main approaches being used to measure AI intelligence, and they each have different philosophies about what makes a fair assessment.

The Mensa Norway test is essentially the same IQ test that humans take to qualify for Mensa membership. It consists of pattern recognition questions where you look at sequences of shapes and figures, then determine what comes next based on the underlying logic. This test has been available online for years and is widely used because it’s proven to be a reliable measure of human intelligence. When AI researchers want to compare artificial intelligence to human cognitive abilities, using an established human test makes perfect sense.

The Offline test takes an alternative approach to solve a potential problem with the Mensa method. Created by Jurij, a Mensa member who designs IQ questions as a hobby, this test uses 16 brand-new questions that have never been published online or made publicly available. The questions test the same type of abstract pattern recognition as Mensa Norway, but they use completely original shapes and designs. The main difference is that no AI model could have encountered these specific questions during its training process.

Why the difference matters comes down to a simple concern: what if AI models are partly relying on having seen the Mensa test questions during training, rather than purely figuring them out through reasoning?

When researchers compared results, they found that top-performing AIs scored about 8% lower (roughly 3 IQ points) on the offline test, while average AIs dropped by 20% (about 6 IQ points). This suggests that some AI models may have a slight advantage on the Mensa test because they are answering questions they’ve potentially already encountered.

The offline test isn’t necessarily “more accurate” than Mensa Norway – both measure real cognitive abilities. However, the offline approach eliminates any possibility that an AI is drawing on memorized patterns rather than pure problem-solving skills, giving us a cleaner picture of an AI’s reasoning capabilities from scratch.

Conclusion

Seeing conflicting GPT-5 IQ scores ranging from 57 to 148 across social media can understandably be confusing, but when you look the matter more deeply, the nuances become clear. Different model variants perform at different levels, and testing methodologies significantly impact results. What initially appears chaotic is actually pretty logical once you understand the distinctions between the GPT-5 Pro, Standard, and Thinking variants.

But ultimately, does it actually matter whether your AI assistant scores 50 or 150 on an IQ test, if it delivers the results you need for your specific tasks? Probably not. If an AI helps you solve problems effectively or assists with your work successfully, the technical IQ measurement becomes secondary to practical use. Rather than getting caught up in benchmark comparisons, focus on whether the AI actually serves your needs well enough.