Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs GPT-6.1 Terra
Full profiles: Gemini 4 Hydrogen (Google) and GPT-6.1 Terra (OpenAI): every benchmark, price and rank.
Updated · Data from 9 sources
As of 13 Nov 2026, Gemini 4 Hydrogen and GPT-6.1 Terra are neck and neck on quality (63.4 vs 64.1 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±2.8 margin), and GPT-6.1 Terra is 1.5× cheaper at $2.00 vs $3.00 per 1M tokens blended. Choose Gemini 4 Hydrogen for knowledge (69 vs 61) and reasoning (70 vs 68) and fast first answers (16.4 s vs 174.1 s), where it also streams ~2× faster; choose GPT-6.1 Terra for maths (72 vs 68) and agents & tools (64 vs 62).
Key facts (as of 13 Nov 2026)
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen scores 63.4 on the BenchLeader Index and GPT-6.1 Terra scores 64.1 (BenchLeader, 13 Nov 2026).
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen costs $3.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 13 Nov 2026).
- GPT-6.1 Terra costs $2.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 13 Nov 2026).
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen streams ~2× faster than GPT-6.1 Terra (Artificial Analysis, 7-day median, 13 Nov 2026).
- Of the 13 benchmarks both models have, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads 9 (BenchLeader, 13 Nov 2026).
- On Arena WebDev, Gemini 4 Hydrogen is rated 1704 and GPT-6.1 Terra 1678 (LMArena, as published by 13 Nov 2026).
Gemini 4 Hydrogen benchmarks 
GPT-6.1 Terra benchmarks Which to pick for…
The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.
| Use case | Pick | Why | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Either | 69 vs 69 category score; Arena WebDev 1704 vs 1678 | Either |
| Agents & tool use | GPT-6.1 Terra | 64 vs 62 category score; Terminal-Bench 53.3% vs 56.4% | Medium |
| Maths | GPT-6.1 Terra | 72 vs 68 category score | Medium |
| Reasoning | Gemini 4 Hydrogen | 70 vs 68 category score; HLE-Diamond (AA) 54.9% vs 47.3% | Medium |
| Knowledge | Gemini 4 Hydrogen | 69 vs 61 category score; AA-Omniscience v1.1 43.7 vs 29.6 | Medium |
| Chat quality (human preference) | – | Only Gemini 4 Hydrogen has an Arena rating (68 category score) | Not comparable |
| Lowest cost | GPT-6.1 Terra | $2.00 vs $3.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.080 vs $0.120 | – |
| Fastest first answer | Gemini 4 Hydrogen | 16.4 s (Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)) vs 174.1 s (GPT-6.1 Terra (max)) to the first answer token | – |
| High volume on a budget | Neither flagship | A smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs | – |
Key differences
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) and GPT-6.1 Terra (max) are neck and neck on quality (63.4 vs 64.1, within the ±2.8 margin).
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) is stronger in knowledge, reasoning.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, maths.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max) is 1.5× cheaper ($2.00 vs $3.00 per 1M blended).
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) streams 2.7× faster (180 vs 68 tokens per second).
At a glance
| Spec | Gemini 4 Hydrogen | GPT-6.1 Terra |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | OpenAI | |
| Released | 12 Nov 2026 | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Context window (tokens) | 1,048,576 | 1,050,000 |
| Compared at | Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) | GPT-6.1 Terra (max) |
| Open weights | No | No |
| Price in / out / cached input per 1M | $1.50 / $7.50 / $0.075 | $1.00 / $5.00 / $0.050 |
Category by category
Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.
| Category | Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) | GPT-6.1 Terra (max) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 69.6 | 68.4 | Gemini 4 Hydrogen |
| Coding | 68.8 | 69.3 | level |
| Agents & tools | 61.9 | 63.5 | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Maths | 67.8 | 71.7 | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Knowledge | 68.5 | 61.4 | Gemini 4 Hydrogen |
| Human preference | 68.2 | – | not comparable |
| Multimodal | – | 67.2 | not comparable |
| Long context | – | 66.0 | not comparable |
On one chart
Each domain on the index's own scale, where 50 is an average model. Click a domain to see the benchmarks behind it. Pick up to 5 models from the list.
Not drawn, measured for fewer than two of these models: Instruction following, Long context, Multimodal, Human preference.
Where sources disagree
Across the 13 benchmarks both have, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads 9, GPT-6.1 Terra leads 4. Independent sources split: Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads on Vals Index; GPT-6.1 Terra leads on AA Intelligence Index v5.0.
| Overall index | Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) | GPT-6.1 Terra (max) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.4 | 64.1 | neck and neck |
| AA Intelligence Index v5.0 | 50.8 | 51.3 | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Vals Index | 68.5† | 60.5 | Gemini 4 Hydrogen |
Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).
Price, speed and latency
List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page. Cost, tokens and time per benchmark task are measured: Artificial Analysis’ averages over its whole Intelligence Index run.
| Measure | Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) | GPT-6.1 Terra (max) |
|---|---|---|
| Blended price per 1M tokens | $3.00 | $2.00 |
| Input / output per 1M | $1.50 / $7.50 | $1.00 / $5.00 |
| Cached input per 1M | $0.075 | $0.050 |
| Price per task: chat reply | $0.0029 | $0.0019 |
| Price per task: summarize a 30-page report | $0.022 | $0.015 |
| Price per task: code edit | $0.020 | $0.013 |
| Price per task: agentic coding session | $0.120 | $0.080 |
| Price per task: structured extraction | $0.0045 | $0.0030 |
| Agentic coding session, input mostly cached | $0.056 | $0.037 |
| Cost per benchmark task (AA Index) | $1.87 | $0.961 |
| Output tokens per task (AA Index) | 85k | 60k |
| Of which reasoning | 48k | 39k |
| Time per task (AA Index) | 8 min | 15 min |
| Output speed | 180 tok/s | 68 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 16.4 s | 174.1 s |
| Time to a complete answer | 63.3 s | 375.7 s |
Per token is not per task: an average task of Artificial Analysis' Intelligence Index cost $1.87 on Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) and $0.961 on GPT-6.1 Terra (max), and Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) wrote 1.4× as many output tokens for the same work, which a per-token price hides.
Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) scores 63.4 and takes 16 s to its first answer token. GPT-6.1 Terra (max) scores 64.1 and takes 174 s to its first answer token; GPT-6.1 Terra (xhigh) scores 60.0 in 34 s, GPT-6.1 Terra (high) scores 59.6 in 12 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.
Every benchmark
72 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.
| Metric | Publisher | Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) | GPT-6.1 Terra (max) |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | BenchLeader | 63.4 | 64.1 |
| Agents & tools score | BenchLeader | 61.9 | 63.5 |
| Coding score | BenchLeader | 68.8 | 69.3 |
| Human preference score | BenchLeader | 68.2 | – |
| Knowledge score | BenchLeader | 68.5 | 61.4 |
| Maths score | BenchLeader | 67.8 | 71.7 |
| Reasoning score | BenchLeader | 69.6 | 68.4 |
| Long context score | BenchLeader | – | 66.0 |
| Multimodal score | BenchLeader | – | 67.2 |
| Blended price $/M | BenchLeader | $3.00 | $2.00 |
| Output speed | BenchLeader | 180 tok/s | 68 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | BenchLeader | 16.4 s | 174.1 s |
| Context window | BenchLeader | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,050,000 tokens |
| Reasoning | |||
| GPQA Diamond | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 94.3% |
| SimpleBench | SimpleBench | – | 72.2%† |
| Arena Hard Prompts | Arena (LMArena) | 1514 | – |
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoning | LiveBench | 88.6%† | 88.7%† |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 46.3% |
| HLE-Diamond (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 54.9% | 47.3% |
| CritPt | Artificial Analysis | – | 28.0% |
| CritPt v2 hard subset (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 61.5% | 68.0% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 74.0% |
| Coding | |||
| SciCode | SciCode | – | 55.1% |
| Arena Coding | Arena (LMArena) | 1518 | – |
| Arena WebDev | Arena (LMArena) | 1704 | 1678 |
| LiveBench 2.0 Coding | LiveBench | 78.5%† | 89.2%† |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | 87.8%† | 84.0% |
| MirrorCode | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 76.7% |
| ALE-Bench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 2608.8 |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 54.0% | 55.6% |
| Startrise Frontend | Startrise | – | 82.0%† |
| Design Arena Website | Design Arena | 1316† | 1286† |
| FrontierCode 1.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 36.0% |
| FrontierCode 2.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 36.3% | 42.3% |
| Agents & tools | |||
| Terminal-Bench | Terminal-Bench | 56.4% | 53.3% |
| APEX-Agents | Mercor | – | 68.3% |
| Arena Agent | Arena (LMArena) | – | 12 |
| LiveBench Long Agentic | LiveBench | 61.8%† | 56.2%† |
Show all 72 benchmarks
| Metric | Publisher | Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) | GPT-6.1 Terra (max) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agents & tools | |||
| LiveBench Browser | LiveBench | 77.1%† | 93.1%† |
| HiL-Bench | Scale AI SEAL | – | 68.0%† |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 1476 |
| Finance Agent v2.1 | Vals AI | 65.1%† | 56.0% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | 11.3%† | 1.7% |
| Legal Research Bench | Vals AI | 53.9%† | 26.0% |
| Tax Agent Bench | Vals AI | 52.3%† | 17.1% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | Vals AI | 54.0%† | 49.5% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Andon Labs | – | 9107.5† |
| AutomationBench | Artificial Analysis | 74.4% | 60.2% |
| GDP.pdf (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 30.0% | 28.6% |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | 1497 | 1403 |
| GDPx | GDPx by SemiAnalysis | – | 8.5% |
| Design Arena Agentic | Design Arena | – | 1187† |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 41.4% | 57.6% |
| FACTS Search | – | 92.7%† | |
| Maths | |||
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 90.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 92.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 100.0% |
| Arena Maths | Arena (LMArena) | 1495 | – |
| Knowledge | |||
| SimpleQA Verified | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 57.3% |
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysis | LiveBench | 83.2%† | 82.3%† |
| LiveBench Research | LiveBench | 86.8%† | 79.1%† |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | 43.7 | 29.6 |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | 75.8%† | 73.3% |
| EBR-bench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 78.1% |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracy | Artificial Analysis | 48.2% | 47.6% |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucination | Artificial Analysis | 91.3% | 65.5% |
| Instruction following | |||
| MultiChallenge | Scale AI SEAL | – | 74.2%† |
| Arena Instruction Following | Arena (LMArena) | 1503 | – |
| Human preference | |||
| Arena Text | Arena (LMArena) | 1490 | – |
| Arena Creative Writing | Arena (LMArena) | 1492 | – |
| Arena Multi-turn | Arena (LMArena) | 1476 | – |
| Arena Longer Queries | Arena (LMArena) | 1514 | – |
| Multimodal | |||
| LiveBench Design | LiveBench | 77.3%† | 79.7%† |
| MMMU-Pro | Artificial Analysis | – | 84.7% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 42.1%† |
| Long context | |||
| AA-LCR v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 82.7% |
| MLCR | Artificial Analysis | 21.1%† | 30.6% |
| Composite | |||
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 167.7† |
| LiveBench 2.0 | LiveBench | 77.0%† | 78.8%† |
| AA Intelligence Index v5.0 | Artificial Analysis | 50.8 | 51.3 |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | Artificial Analysis | – | 48.1 |
| AA Progress Index v1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 345.2 |
| Vals Index | Vals AI | 68.5† | 60.5 |
| Vals Finance Index | Vals AI | 66.1%† | 53.3% |
| Safety & honesty | |||
| FORTRESS | Scale AI SEAL | – | 18.2%† |
Data as of 2026-11-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
What changed
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): BenchLeader Index 64.7 → 64.1.
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high): 10 new results (Arena Text, Arena Hard Prompts, Arena Coding…).
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): 1 new result (Terminal-Bench).
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): BenchLeader Index 65.2 → 64.7.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): 1 new result (MirrorCode).
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): 1 score revision.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): 1 score revision.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): 1 score revision.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): 1 score revision.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (max): 1 score revision.
Related comparisons
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs Claude Fable 5.2
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra vs Claude Fable 5.2
- GPT-6.1 Terra vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6.1 Terra vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra vs GPT-6 Astra
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs GPT-6.1 Sol
Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for coding · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs
Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs GPT-6.1 Terra: questions
- Is Gemini 4 Hydrogen better than GPT-6.1 Terra?
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) and GPT-6.1 Terra (max) are neck and neck on quality (63.4 vs 64.1, within the ±2.8 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 13 Nov 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs GPT-6.1 Terra: which is cheaper, and will that change?
- GPT-6.1 Terra is cheaper today: $2.00 against $3.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
- Is Gemini 4 Hydrogen or GPT-6.1 Terra better for coding?
- They are level in coding (69 vs 69 on the category index). On Arena WebDev, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 1704 for Gemini 4 Hydrogen against 1678 for GPT-6.1 Terra.
- Which is faster, Gemini 4 Hydrogen or GPT-6.1 Terra?
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen streams ~2× faster (180 vs 68 output tokens per second, Artificial Analysis 7-day median).
- Is Gemini 4 Hydrogen or GPT-6.1 Terra better for agents and tool use?
- GPT-6.1 Terra scores higher in agentic tasks (64 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Terminal-Bench, the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 56.4% for Gemini 4 Hydrogen against 53.3% for GPT-6.1 Terra.
More questions (4)
- Which is better for long documents?
- Both take about 1.1M tokens: Gemini 4 Hydrogen 1,048,576, GPT-6.1 Terra 1,050,000.
- Which has lower latency?
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen answers first: 16.4 s against 174.1 s to the first answer token, as Artificial Analysis measures it. Reasoning effort drives most of this: a higher setting thinks longer before it answers.
- Do independent benchmarks agree on Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs GPT-6.1 Terra?
- Across the 13 benchmarks both have, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads 9, GPT-6.1 Terra leads 4. Independent sources split: Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads on Vals Index; GPT-6.1 Terra leads on AA Intelligence Index v5.0.
- When was Gemini 4 Hydrogen released?
- Gemini 4 Hydrogen was released on 12 Nov 2026.