Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

GPT-6.1 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra

Updated November 13, 2026. Rank says GPT-6 Astra is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. This is a same-family comparison, so migration details appear when the source data supports them.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInAPI/MCP

Decision reading

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score estimate, 85.68 versus 84.63, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner. 29 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
OpenAI logo

OpenAI

84.63/100

Supported · Public rank #5

90% interval 80.4–88.9

Model B
OpenAI logo

OpenAI

85.68/100

Supported · Public rank #4

90% interval 80.3–91.0

API price per 1M tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol: $2 input / $10 output

GPT-6 Astra: $10 input / $50 output

Context window

GPT-6.1 Sol: 1.05M

GPT-6 Astra: 1.05M

Released

GPT-6.1 Sol: September 29, 2026

GPT-6 Astra: September 3, 2026

Shared results
29
GPT-6.1 Sol only
0
GPT-6 Astra only
29
Like-for-like categories
5 / 8
Supported: GPT-6.1 Sol and GPT-6 AstraHow the comparison works

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.

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    GPT-6 Astra

    GPT-6 Astra has the higher public coding point estimate, 78.7 to 73.4, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

    Confidence: limited
  • Agentic work

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

    GPT-6 Astra

    GPT-6 Astra has the higher public agentic point estimate, 73.7 to 65.7, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

    Confidence: limited
  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    GPT-6.1 Sol

    GPT-6.1 Sol has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

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

    GPT-6.1 Sol

    GPT-6.1 Sol has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    GPT-6.1 Sol

    GPT-6.1 Sol has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

73.4GPT-6.1 Sol78.7GPT-6 Astra

Like-for-like · BenchAlign v5.8

GPT-6 Astra has the higher coding point estimate. Conditional score ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Same basis rules as the category table below

Or describe your own job

The LLM Selector reads what you need a model for and returns a shortlist, ranked in the same order the job pages publish.

Describe the task and constraints. This selector recommends models; it cannot carry out the task or access your files and accounts.

We keep what you type here, drafts included, for 180 days, and after that only the job and requirements read from it. Nothing is tied to your IP address or account. Leave out names and other personal details. Privacy

What is actually comparable

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

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.

Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Like-for-like
GPT-6.1 Sol
65.7
Supported · #17/135
GPT-6 Astra
73.7
Supported · #7/135
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 20 public rows
Reading
GPT-6 Astra leads · intervals overlap

Coding

Like-for-like
GPT-6.1 Sol
73.4
Supported · #8/162
GPT-6 Astra
78.7
Supported · #5/162
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 6 vs 10 public rows
Reading
GPT-6 Astra leads · intervals overlap

Reasoning

Like-for-like
GPT-6.1 Sol
80.4
Supported · #5/160
GPT-6 Astra
81.1
Supported · #3/160
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 6 vs 10 public rows
Reading
GPT-6 Astra leads · intervals overlap

Multimodal

Like-for-like
GPT-6.1 Sol
78.9
Supported · #4/67
GPT-6 Astra
79.7
Supported · #3/67
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 3 vs 6 public rows
Reading
GPT-6 Astra leads · intervals overlap

Knowledge

Like-for-like
GPT-6.1 Sol
85.6
Supported · #3/180
GPT-6 Astra
85.4
Supported · #4/180
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 5 vs 9 public rows
Reading
Practical tie

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-6.1 Sol
Not ranked
GPT-6 Astra
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
GPT-6.1 Sol
Not ranked
GPT-6 Astra
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-6.1 Sol
93.8
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
GPT-6 Astra
93.8
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

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-6.1 Sol
$0.007
Fits in one request
GPT-6 Astra
$0.035
Fits in one request

GPT-6.1 Sol has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol
$0.13
Fits in one request
GPT-6 Astra
$0.65
Fits in one request

GPT-6.1 Sol has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

GPT-6.1 Sol
$0.16
Fits in one request
GPT-6 Astra
$0.9
Fits in one request

GPT-6.1 Sol has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Your workload

Enter a month of tokens to price it at both models’ listed API rates.

GPT-6.1 Sol
$40.00
per month
GPT-6 Astra
$200.00
per month

Standard listed rates, no batch or volume discounts.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

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

Reasoning profile

GPT-6.1 Sol

Reasoning

GPT-6 Astra

Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-6.1 Sol

Proprietary

GPT-6 Astra

Proprietary

License

GPT-6.1 Sol

Proprietary

GPT-6 Astra

Proprietary

Release date

GPT-6.1 Sol

2026-09-29

GPT-6 Astra

2026-09-03

If you are choosing between sibling variants

Deployment change
Both entries list OpenAI as the provider. Confirm endpoint, model ID, limits, and feature support before switching.
Quality signal
GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score estimate, 85.68 versus 84.63, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
Workload cost
Repository review: $0.13 vs $0.65. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.16 vs $0.9.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 1.05M.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, GPT-6.1 Sol or GPT-6 Astra?

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score estimate, 85.68 versus 84.63, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.

Which is better for coding, GPT-6.1 Sol or GPT-6 Astra?

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public coding point estimate, 78.7 to 73.4, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-6.1 Sol or GPT-6 Astra?

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public agentic tasks point estimate, 73.7 to 65.7, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Which costs less, GPT-6.1 Sol or GPT-6 Astra?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.007 on GPT-6.1 Sol and $0.035 on GPT-6 Astra; repository review costs $0.13 and $0.65; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.16 and $0.9. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-6.1 Sol or GPT-6 Astra?

Both models list the same context window, 1.05M.

Benchmark evidence

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

Browse raw public benchmark evidence58 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 4.1

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol60.90%
    GPT-6 Astra60.30%

    GPT-6.1 Sol leads this result

  • AutomationBench

    GPT-6.1 Sol36.1%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra41.4%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1

    GPT-6.1 Sol57.0%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra64.6%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ExploitGym

    GPT-6.1 Sol35.1%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra42.4%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • MazeBench

    GPT-6.1 Sol17%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra23%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • Hermes Index

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol57.1%
    GPT-6 Astra56.3%

    GPT-6.1 Sol leads this result

  • Hermes Bench

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol73.9%
    GPT-6 Astra73.7%

    GPT-6.1 Sol leads this result

  • LifeVal

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra80.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra91.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra72.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 4.0

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra57.90%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Agents' Last Exam

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra59.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/ tools

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra57.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra87.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ApprenticeBench

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra68%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CWE-bench v1

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra68.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.1

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra75.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RoboDojo Sim

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra29.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Remote Labor Index

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra20.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CWE-bench

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra64.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • ScarfBench

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol68.4%
    GPT-6 Astra65.4%

    GPT-6.1 Sol leads this result

  • DeepSWE

    GPT-6.1 Sol71.9%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra74.1%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • Bug Hunt Bench

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol44.3 fixes
    GPT-6 Astra45.0 fixes

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • FrontierCode 2.0

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol39.0%
    GPT-6 Astra42.8%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • VulcanBench Frontier v4

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol88.8%
    GPT-6 Astra89.3%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • PostTrainBench

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol38.8%
    GPT-6 Astra41.9%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • FrontierCode 1.1 Main

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra53.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierCode 1.1 Extended

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra64.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierSWE v2

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra65.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PostTrainBench v1.1

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra44.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • BioBasicsBench

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol62.6%
    GPT-6 Astra67.0%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • GPT-6.1 Sol2.76
    GPT-6 Astra2.81

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ARC-AGI-1

    GPT-6.1 Sol96.50%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra97.50%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ARC-AGI-2

    GPT-6.1 Sol94.2%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra95%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ARC-AGI-3

    GPT-6.1 Sol52.7%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra62.7%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ARC-AGI-3 Provider Adapter

    GPT-6.1 Sol96.18%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra98.55%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • GeneBench-Pro

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra37.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MRCR v2 256K-512K

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra100.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MRCR v2 512K-1M

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra96.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GraphWalks BFS 256K–1M

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra71.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • ExtractBench (LlamaIndex)

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol95.31%
    GPT-6 Astra91.91%

    GPT-6.1 Sol leads this result

  • ExtractBench Pro

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol12%
    GPT-6 Astra58%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ParseBench

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol69.63%
    GPT-6 Astra69.81%

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • ScreenSpot Pro

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra92.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BenchCAD Vision2Code (tools)

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra0.959
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Biomedical image analysis

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra77.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • HealthBench (raw)

    GPT-6.1 Sol56.7%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra56.9%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • HealthBench (length-adjusted)

    GPT-6.1 Sol58.5%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra58.3%
    Source

    GPT-6.1 Sol leads this result

  • HealthBench Professional

    GPT-6.1 Sol64.2%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra64.7%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • HealthBench Professional (raw)

    GPT-6.1 Sol67.2%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra68.2%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • HealthBench Hard

    GPT-6.1 Sol36.2%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra36.6%
    Source

    GPT-6 Astra leads this result

  • GPQA

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra96%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra96.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PhysicianBench

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra48.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Morphology-to-molecule matching

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra22.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • Gray Swan IPI (15 attempts)

    GPT-6.1 Sol—
    GPT-6 Astra8.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Shared source
    GPT-6.1 Sol93.684%
    GPT-6 Astra93.684%

    Tie

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    GPT-6.1 Sol100.000%
    Source
    GPT-6 Astra97.600%
    Source

    GPT-6.1 Sol leads this result

58 public results · 29 shared

Watch GPT-6.1 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra

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

Read a sample issue

Join 7,000+ subscribers.

Last updated November 13, 2026