Skip to main content
Radar

Provider changes are easy to miss. Radar watches releases, pricing, deprecations, and incidents at the source.Provider changes are easy to miss.

See Radar
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

GPT-5.6 Terra vs ZAYA1-8B

Updated August 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

GPT-5.6 Terra

OpenAI

72.3/100

Estimated · Public rank #12

90% interval 62.6–82.0

ZAYA1-8B

Zyphra

31.4/100

Estimated · Public rank #202

90% interval 21.5–41.2

GPT-5.6 Terra has the higher public score, 72.29 versus 31.36, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.

2 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    GPT-5.6 Terra

    GPT-5.6 Terra has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. ZAYA1-8B does not fit this workload in one request. ZAYA1-8B has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
2
GPT-5.6 Terra only
20
ZAYA1-8B only
9
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

1 category uses different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.

Knowledge

Directional only
GPT-5.6 Terra
92.9
ZAYA1-8B
73.6
Weighted basis
1 vs 2 rows
Reading
Directional only

Agentic

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra
87.4
ZAYA1-8B
Not measured
Weighted basis
2 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra
63.4
ZAYA1-8B
Not measured
Weighted basis
1 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra
83.9
ZAYA1-8B
Not measured
Weighted basis
1 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra
80.8
ZAYA1-8B
80.4
Weighted basis
2 vs 2 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra
Not measured
ZAYA1-8B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra
80.7
ZAYA1-8B
Not measured
Weighted basis
1 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
GPT-5.6 Terra
Not measured
ZAYA1-8B
64.1
Weighted basis
0 vs 2 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5.6 Terra
$0.008
Fits in one request
ZAYA1-8B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

ZAYA1-8B has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.6 Terra
$0.136
Fits in one request
ZAYA1-8B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

ZAYA1-8B has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.6 Terra
$0.2
Fits in one request
ZAYA1-8B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Does not fit in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

ZAYA1-8B does not fit this workload in one request. ZAYA1-8B has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

GPT-5.6 Terra

1.05M

OpenAI model catalog

ZAYA1-8B

131K

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

GPT-5.6 Terra

$0.2 per 1M cached input tokens

OpenAI pricing

ZAYA1-8B

No comparable hosted API rate

Provider availability

GPT-5.6 Terra

Generally Available · OpenAI Responses API

OpenAI model catalog

ZAYA1-8B

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

GPT-5.6 Terra

Reasoning

ZAYA1-8B

Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-5.6 Terra

Proprietary

ZAYA1-8B

Open Weight

License

GPT-5.6 Terra

Proprietary

ZAYA1-8B

Open Weight

Release date

GPT-5.6 Terra

2026-07-09

ZAYA1-8B

2026-05-05

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
GPT-5.6 Terra has the higher public score, 72.29 versus 31.36, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
GPT-5.6 Terra has the larger documented window (1.05M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence31 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5.6 Terra87.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    GPT-5.6 Terra87.5%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    GPT-5.6 Terra50.2%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • CyberGym

    GPT-5.6 Terra81.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • ExploitGym

    GPT-5.6 Terra23.2%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon

    GPT-5.6 Terra53.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • BFCL v4

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B39.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Pro

    GPT-5.6 Terra63.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5.6 Terra87.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • deepSwe

    GPT-5.6 Terra69.6%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierCode 1.1 Extended

    GPT-5.6 Terra55.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • cursorBench32

    GPT-5.6 Terra64.9%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B65.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • ARC-AGI-2

    GPT-5.6 Terra83.9%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-3

    GPT-5.6 Terra0.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    GPT-5.6 Terra92.9%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B71%
    Source

    GPT-5.6 Terra leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    GPT-5.6 Terra92.9%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B71.0%
    Source

    GPT-5.6 Terra leads this result

  • HealthBench Professional

    GPT-5.6 Terra57.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • HealthBench Hard

    GPT-5.6 Terra32.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B74.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath (legacy)

    GPT-5.6 Terra84.9%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    GPT-5.6 Terra84.900%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    GPT-5.6 Terra68.300%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME26

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B89.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B71.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IMOAnswerBench

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B59.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Apex

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B32.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU-Pro

    GPT-5.6 Terra80.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMU-Pro w/ Python

    GPT-5.6 Terra82%
    Source
    ZAYA1-8B—

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B85.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IFBench

    GPT-5.6 Terra—
    ZAYA1-8B52.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, GPT-5.6 Terra or ZAYA1-8B?

GPT-5.6 Terra has the higher public score, 72.29 versus 31.36, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.6 Terra or ZAYA1-8B?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.6 Terra or ZAYA1-8B?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.

Which costs less, GPT-5.6 Terra or ZAYA1-8B?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-5.6 Terra or ZAYA1-8B?

GPT-5.6 Terra has the larger documented context window: 1.05M, compared with 131K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated August 10, 2026

Watch GPT-5.6 Terra vs ZAYA1-8B

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.