Capability
48.8/100
field median 59
#147 of 231 ranked models
Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.
See the free Radar BriefReleased December 2024 — see all recent releases
Data as of September 3, 2026 · How the score is built
Instruction Following ranks #21. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
4 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty.
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Capability
48.8/100
field median 59
#147 of 231 ranked models
Price
$15input / $60 output
input median $1
blended $37.50
Speed
98tok/s
field median 91 tok/s
First token 32.29 s
Context
200Ktokens
field median 256,000
Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
o1 category percentile values
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticWeight 22%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 22% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| CodingWeight 20%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 20% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| KnowledgeRank Not rankedWeight 12%2 benchmarksVerified | 66.9 | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | 32.7 | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| Inst. FollowingRank #21 of 43Percentile 52ndWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | 86.3 | #21 of 43 | 52nd | 5% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
Knowledge opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score75.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap20.3 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| MMLUMassive Multitask Language Understanding | Score91.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: o1 · 91.8% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)FrontierMath v2 Tiers 1-3 | Score9.310% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 89.000% | Gap79.7 behind | WeightWeighted 30% | Benchmark exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IFEvalInstruction-Following Eval | Score92.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.5-27B · 95% | Gap2.8 behind | WeightWeighted 35% | Provider exact |
This chart appears only when at least two dated first-party price records exist for the exact model. It shows rate changes, not an inferred cost trend.
2 dated first-party price records. The newest record lists $60 per million tokens.
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. A successor's displayed score stays at least 0.1 points above its predecessor; raw benchmark rows do not move. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Sep 12, 2024
o1-previewNot publicly ranked · $15 / $60
December 2024 · you are here
o1Score 48.8 · $15 / $60
Base entry
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
o1 ranks #147 of 231 on the public leaderboard with a score of 48.76/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
o1 is a proprietary model with a 200K context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
o1 sits in the o1 family with o1-preview, o1-pro. Its explicit predecessor is o1-preview. 4 of 417 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #21. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
OpenAI · Model release
Radar confirmed these at the source. Already tracking o1? See the free Radar Brief for what changes next.
o1 ranks #147 out of 231 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 48.76/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 4 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
o1 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for knowledge and understanding, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
o1 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
o1 ranks #21 out of 43 eligible models for instruction following, with a public category score of 86.3/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
o1 belongs to the o1 family. Related tracked variants include o1-preview, o1-pro. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.
No. o1 currently has 16 source-displayable rows across 417 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
o1 has a reported context window of 200K in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.
Related resources
Last updated September 3, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.