Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Terra vs Holo3-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.6 Terra #10 (Estimated); Holo3-35B-A3B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.6 Terra and Holo3-35B-A3B share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 43 results are unique to GPT-5.6 Terra; 1 to Holo3-35B-A3B.
Updated July 17, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- GPT-5.6 Terra only
- 43
- Holo3-35B-A3B only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Holo3-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.6 Terra only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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
Holo3-35B-A3B has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 74 versus 72.58. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
GPT-5.6 Terra is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-35B-A3B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-5.6 Terra gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-35B-A3B.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Terra | Holo3-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.6 Terra$2.5 input / $15 output | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.6 TerraNot available | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.6 TerraNot available | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.6 Terra1M | Holo3-35B-A3B64K | GPT-5.6 Terra lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.6 Terra wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Holo3-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 87.4% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 50.2% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 23.2% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 53.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 47.4% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 54.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1593 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 2.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 51.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 31.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 45.6% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 82.6% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Holo3-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 63.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 87.4% | — | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | 69.6% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | 55.8% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 64.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 76.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 57.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | 88.0% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Holo3-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 57.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 32.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 55.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 41.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -0.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 45.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 85.2% | — | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Holo3-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 71.2% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-5.6 Terra or Holo3-35B-A3B?
Holo3-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 74 to 72.58.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.6 Terra or Holo3-35B-A3B?
GPT-5.6 Terra has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.4 versus 82.6. Holo3-35B-A3B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.