Math
Directional only- GPT-6 Astra
- 97.6
- o4-mini (high)
- 20.2
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Directional only
GPT-6 Astra vs o4-mini (high)
Updated September 3, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score, 81.88 versus 50.97, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
1 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-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra 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. o4-mini (high) does not fit this workload in one request. o4-mini (high) 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.
15 GPT-6 Astra only
1 Shared
1 o4-mini (high) only
- Shared results
- 1
- GPT-6 Astra only
- 15
- o4-mini (high) only
- 1
- 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.
Agentic
Not comparable- GPT-6 Astra
- Not measured
- o4-mini (high)
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Coding
Not comparable- GPT-6 Astra
- Not measured
- o4-mini (high)
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- GPT-6 Astra
- 95.0
- o4-mini (high)
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- GPT-6 Astra
- 96.0
- o4-mini (high)
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- GPT-6 Astra
- Not measured
- o4-mini (high)
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- GPT-6 Astra
- Not measured
- o4-mini (high)
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- GPT-6 Astra
- Not measured
- o4-mini (high)
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | GPT-6 Astra | o4-mini (high) | Weighted basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Math | 97.6 | 20.2 | Directional only1 vs 2 rows | Directional only |
| Agentic | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | 95.0 | Not measured | Not comparable1 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | 96.0 | Not measured | Not comparable1 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | 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.
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
Math
GPT-6 Astra: 97.600%o4-mini (high): 6.250%Normalized gap 91.3GPT-6 Astra source o4-mini (high) source
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 Astra
- $0.035
- Fits in one request
- o4-mini (high)
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
o4-mini (high) has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- GPT-6 Astra
- $0.65
- Fits in one request
- o4-mini (high)
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
o4-mini (high) has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- GPT-6 Astra
- $0.9
- Fits in one request
- o4-mini (high)
- API rate not published
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
o4-mini (high) does not fit this workload in one request. o4-mini (high) 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.
SpecificationGPT-6 Astrao4-mini (high)
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
GPT-6 Astra
o4-mini (high)
200K
API model ID
GPT-6 Astra
gpt-6-astra
OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentationo4-mini (high)
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
GPT-6 Astra
$1 per 1M cached input tokens
OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentationo4-mini (high)
No comparable hosted API rate
Documented inputs
GPT-6 Astra
text, image
OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentationo4-mini (high)
Not sourced
Documented outputs
GPT-6 Astra
o4-mini (high)
Not sourced
Provider availability
GPT-6 Astra
Limited Availability · OpenAI Responses API, ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business, and Enterprise
OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentationo4-mini (high)
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
GPT-6 Astra
Reasoning
o4-mini (high)
Reasoning
Weight access
GPT-6 Astra
Proprietary
o4-mini (high)
Proprietary
License
GPT-6 Astra
Proprietary
o4-mini (high)
Proprietary
Release date
GPT-6 Astra
2026-09-03
o4-mini (high)
2025-04-16
If you already use one of these models
- 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, 81.88 versus 50.97, 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-6 Astra 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 evidence17 rows
Agentic
OSWorld 2.0
GPT-6 Astra72.6%Sourceo4-mini (high)—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 4.0
GPT-6 Astra57.70%Sourceo4-mini (high)—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1
GPT-6 Astra64.6%Sourceo4-mini (high)—Not directly comparable
ExploitGym
GPT-6 Astra42.4%Sourceo4-mini (high)—Not directly comparable
Agents' Last Exam
GPT-6 Astra59.3%Sourceo4-mini (high)—Not directly comparable
Coding
deepSwe
GPT-6 Astra74.1%Sourceo4-mini (high)—Not directly comparable
Reasoning
Knowledge
Math
Multimodal
ScreenSpot Pro
GPT-6 Astra92.7%Sourceo4-mini (high)—Not directly comparable
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, GPT-6 Astra or o4-mini (high)?
GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score, 81.88 versus 50.97, 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-6 Astra or o4-mini (high)?
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-6 Astra or o4-mini (high)?
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-6 Astra or o4-mini (high)?
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-6 Astra or o4-mini (high)?
GPT-6 Astra has the larger documented context window: 1.05M, compared with 200K.
Related comparisons
Last updated September 3, 2026
Watch GPT-6 Astra vs o4-mini (high)
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.