Capability
45.5/100
field median 58.1
#157 of 232 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 4, 2026 · How the score is built
Share or export
Published rows are visible, but no category has enough eligible evidence for a comparative rank.
1 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Independent runtime speed has not been measured.
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
45.5/100
field median 58.1
#157 of 232 ranked models
Price
$150input / $600 output
input median $1
blended $375
Speed
Not measured
field median 92 tok/s
Time to first token not measured
Context
200Ktokens
field median 256,000
Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
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%1 benchmarkReported | 79.0 | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 1 benchmark | Reported |
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| 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. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
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 | Score79% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap17 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Reported |
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.
December 2024 · you are here
o1-proScore 45.5 · $150 / $600
Pro
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
o1-pro ranks #157 of 232 on the public leaderboard with a score of 45.5/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
o1-pro 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-pro sits in the o1 family with o1, o1-preview. 1 of 422 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
o1-pro ranks #157 out of 232 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 45.5/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 1 source-displayable benchmark row. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
o1-pro 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-pro belongs to the o1 family. Related tracked variants include o1, o1-preview. 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-pro currently has 2 source-displayable rows across 422 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-pro 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 4, 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.