OpenAIGPT-6 Astra
Reasoning effort
GPT-6 Astra is an OpenAI proprietary reasoning model, released 2 Sept 2026. Its best configuration (max reasoning effort) ranks #5 of 785 on the BenchLeader Index at 70.4 ±3.8, in the top ten. The ± is the point: 43 other configurations score within that range, so they and this one cannot be told apart on quality alone — price and speed are what separate them. It scores highest in composite (88) and lowest in agents & tools (64). At $20.00 per million tokens blended it is among the most expensive ranked models. Output speed of 58 tokens per second puts it slower than most, with a first answer in 247.0 s. It has been measured at 7 reasoning-effort settings; this summary describes the best-scoring one, and the tabs above switch between them. Last measured 22 Oct 2026.
- Blended price
- $20.00/M
- $10.00 in · $50.00 out
- Output speed
- 58 tok/s
- measured by Artificial Analysis
- First answer
- 247 s
- first token 5.13 s
- Context
- 1.1M
- Full answer
- 256 s
- median, reasoning included
- Cost per run
- $3.26
- one full Intelligence Index run
- Released
- 2 Sept 2026
- Overall index70
- Reasoning76
- Coding74
- Agents & tools64
- Maths72
- Knowledge80
- Human preference67
- Multimodal66
- Long context65
- Composite88
Reasoning-effort configurations
The same model behaves differently depending on how much it is allowed to think. Each row is one setting, scored only on the benchmarks that were run at that setting. “Not stated” collects results from publishers that did not say which setting they used; for a reasoning model that is usually its thinking mode, but we do not assume it. Pick a setting here or at the top of the page to see its price, speed and category scores.
| Effort | Index | Rank | Speed | First answer | Chat reply cost | Categories |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no reasoning | 59.0 | #142 | 36 tok/s | 5.13 s | $0.019 | Coding 59 · Maths 70 · Reasoning 65 |
| low | 65.9 | #36 | 53 tok/s | 2.22 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 58 · Coding 60 · Composite 81 · Knowledge 80 · Long context 65 · Maths 72 · Multimodal 68 · Reasoning 76 |
| medium | 67.5 | #23 | 53 tok/s | 4.04 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 61 · Coding 60 · Composite 85 · Knowledge 81 · Long context 65 · Maths 77 · Multimodal 68 · Reasoning 79 |
| high | 69.6 | #8 | 56 tok/s | 35 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 65 · Coding 70 · Composite 87 · Knowledge 81 · Long context 65 · Maths 77 · Multimodal 70 · Reasoning 79 |
| xhigh | 68.9 | #14 | 54 tok/s | 130 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 67 · Coding 62 · Composite 88 · Knowledge 81 · Long context 65 · Maths 77 · Multimodal 69 · Reasoning 80 |
| maxbest | 70.4 | #5 | 58 tok/s | 247 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 64 · Coding 74 · Composite 88 · Human preference 67 · Knowledge 80 · Long context 65 · Maths 72 · Multimodal 66 · Reasoning 76 |
| not stated | 68.0 | #17 | 36 tok/s | 5.13 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 70 · Coding 83 · Composite 71 · Knowledge 56 · Maths 78 · Reasoning 86 |
What more thinking costs
Turning the effort up buys index points and multiplies the bill. Here max costs 4.0× low for +4.5 on the index — 2.3 points per doubling of spend. Compare that with other models.
How its index has moved
8 Sept 2026 to 23 Oct 2026- max
- high
- xhigh
- not stated
The index is recomputed from scratch every day, so a line moves when a new benchmark result lands, when a publisher revises a score, or when the models it is normalised against change. Early movement usually means the score is still settling.
Benchmark results
See all LLM benchmarks. One column per reasoning effort. Rank is among every configuration of every model on that benchmark. Hover a score for the run it came from.
Reasoning
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | – | – | – | – | – | 95.8%#2 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Humanity's Last Exameffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | – | 54.8%#1 | Scale AI / CAIS | |
| Arena Hard Prompts | – | – | – | – | – | 1501#32 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoningnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | – | 92.7%#2 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Reasoningnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 92.7%#1 | – | LiveBench | |
| GPQA Diamond (AA)not in index | – | 93.1%#24 | 93.9%#10 | 95.0%#4 | 96.3%#1 | 96.1%#2 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA)not in index | – | 49.2%#30 | 52.7%#20 | 53.1%#17 | 54.6%#13 | 54.7%#12 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 86.0%#107 | 96.5%#23 | 97.5%#12 | 98.5%#1 | 98.5%#1 | 97.5%#12 | – | ARC Prize | |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 59.6%#90 | 85.4%#28 | 92.1%#7 | 92.1%#7 | 93.3%#3 | 95.0%#1 | – | ARC Prize | |
| ARC-AGI-3 | 96.7%#9 | 98.0%#5 | 98.4%#3 | 99.9%#1 | 98.4%#3 | 98.6%#2 | – | ARC Prize | |
| CritPt | – | 26.3%#38 | 29.1%#20 | 28.9%#23 | 31.4%#8 | 31.7%#3 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| MysteryMechanismnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 53.1%#1 | – | Vals AI | |
| Chess Puzzlesnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 74.0%#2 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Mystery Game Puzzlesnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 84.0%#1 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LMCAnot in index | – | 62.2%#29 | 62.9%#23 | 63.8%#18 | 64.4%#16 | – | 64.1%#17 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| DTBenchnot in index | – | 94.9%#46 | 97.1%#17 | 96.5%#22 | 97.3%#9 | – | 97.1%#17 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| BTF-3not in index | – | 13.5%#9 | – | – | – | – | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub |
Coding
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 53.5%#75 | 54.0%#67 | 54.2%#64 | 55.4%#48 | 55.7%#45 | 56.5%#37 | – | SciCode | |
| WeirdML | – | – | – | 92.9%#4 | – | 93.3%#2 | – | WeirdML | |
| FrontierCode | – | – | – | – | – | 53.3%#4 | – | Cognition | |
| GSO-Bencheffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | – | 79.4%#2 | GSO-Bench | |
| Arena Coding | – | – | – | – | – | 1543#9 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena WebDev | – | – | – | – | – | 1775#2 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Codingnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | – | 93.7%#8 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Codingnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 80.4%#20 | – | LiveBench | |
| SciCode (AA)not in index | – | 54.0%#70 | 54.2%#67 | 55.4%#52 | 55.7%#48 | 56.5%#38 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| IOI | – | – | – | – | – | 100.0%#1 | – | Vals AI | |
| Code Migrationnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 67.7%#3 | – | Vals AI | |
| Code Migration v1.1not in index | – | – | – | – | – | 80.6%#3 | – | Vals AI | |
| ProgramBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 5.5%#4 | – | Vals AI | |
| SWE-bench Multimodalnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 43.3%#11 | – | Vals AI | |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100not in index | – | – | – | – | – | 27.6%#5 | – | Vals AI | |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1not in index | – | – | – | – | – | 89.6%#7 | – | Vals AI | |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAnot in index | – | – | – | – | 59.1%#3 | – | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoringnot in index | – | – | – | – | 59.0%#1 | – | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writingnot in index | – | – | – | – | 50.7%#5 | – | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| MirrorCodenot in index | – | – | – | 46.7%#5 | – | – | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| DeepSWE v1.1not in index | – | 67.0%#22 | 72.8%#8 | 73.2%#4 | 74.1%#1 | 73.2%#4 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| ALE-Benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 2951.3#1 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| FrontierSWEnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 65.5%#1 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)not in index | – | 41.9%#29 | 49.5%#20 | 54.0%#13 | 59.6%#3 | 59.1%#6 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)not in index | – | 88.0%#12 | 89.5%#5 | 89.9%#3 | 89.1%#7 | 88.4%#10 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Startrise Frontendnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | – | 79.9%#3 | Startrise | |
| FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)not in index | – | – | – | – | – | 47.0%#8 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Agents & tools
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 50.6%#32 | 54.2%#26 | 57.9%#19 | 57.9%#19 | 58.2%#17 | – | Terminal-Bench | |
| Remote Labor Indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 20.8%#2 | Scale AI / CAIS | |
| APEX-Agentseffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 64.7%#8 | Mercor | |
| Arena Agent | – | – | – | – | 14.7#2 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench Long Agenticnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 82.4%#2 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Browsernot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 84.0%#10 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Agentic Codingnot in index | – | – | – | – | 57.3%#21 | – | LiveBench | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | – | – | – | 87.3%#2 | – | Vals AI | |
| HiL-Bencheffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 65.3%#3 | Scale AI SEAL | |
| GDPval-AA v2.1not in index | 44.5%#52 | 49.3%#38 | 51.2%#35 | 52.9%#30 | 53.7%#29 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| τ³-Banking (AA) | 32.0%#60 | 35.5%#46 | 40.0%#30 | 43.1%#21 | 41.4%#26 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| ITBench SRE (AA)not in index | – | – | – | – | 48.6%#8 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Analyst Agent (AA)not in index | – | – | – | – | 51.3%#9 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| CUA-benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 19.2%#1 | – | Vals AI | |
| CyberBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 41.1%#42 | – | Vals AI | |
| Finance Agent v2not in index | – | – | – | – | 53.5%#33 | – | Vals AI | |
| Finance Agent v2.1not in index | – | – | – | – | 60.4%#18 | – | Vals AI | |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1not in index | – | – | – | – | 7.1%#19 | – | Vals AI | |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1not in index | – | – | – | – | 5.4%#35 | – | Vals AI | |
| Legal Research Benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 39.4%#32 | – | Vals AI | |
| Robo-benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 23.3%#2 | – | Vals AI | |
| SREBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 56.9%#1 | – | Vals AI | |
| Tax Agent Benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 20.7%#45 | – | Vals AI | |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)not in index | – | – | – | – | 59.6%#3 | – | Vals AI | |
| Terminal-Bench Sciencenot in index | – | – | – | – | 62.9%#1 | – | Vals AI | |
| Time Horizon Index: KSPnot in index | – | – | – | – | 90.5%#2 | – | Vals AI | |
| Arena Searchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 1246#3 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| BALROGnot in index | – | – | – | – | 68.3%#1 | – | BALROG | |
| Vending-Bench 2not in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 15514.7#1 | Andon Labs | |
| AutomationBenchnot in index | 59.1%#42 | 64.6%#21 | 66.6%#15 | 67.2%#11 | 68.5%#8 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| GDP.pdf (AA)not in index | 30.4%#10 | 30.4%#10 | 31.0%#6 | 32.2%#2 | 31.0%#6 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Harvey LAB-AA v1.1not in index | – | – | – | – | 8.6%#5 | – | Harvey | |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1not in index | 1255#45 | 1460#35 | 1505#28 | 1543#20 | 1568#18 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)not in index | – | – | – | – | 63.3%#1 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| CWE-Bench (AA) | – | – | – | – | 63.3%#5 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| DeepSec-Bench (AA) | – | – | – | – | 36.9%#2 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| CyberGym end-to-end (AA) | – | – | – | – | 0.0%#18 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| FACTS Searchnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 89.9%#1 |
Maths
| Benchmark | no reasoning | low | medium | high | xhigh | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | – | – | – | – | 93.7%#1 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 82.9%#11 | 87.8%#9 | 97.6%#5 | 97.6%#2 | 97.6%#2 | 97.6%#2 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | – | – | – | – | 100.0%#1 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| ProofBencheffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | – | 99.0%#4 | Vals AI | |
| LiveBench Mathematicsnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 96.8%#4 | – | LiveBench | |
| Arena Maths | – | – | – | – | – | 1487#34 | – | Arena (LMArena) |
Knowledge
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | – | – | – | – | 75.6%#2 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysisnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 83.0%#2 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Researchnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 85.2%#7 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Data Analysisnot in index | – | – | – | – | 83.0%#1 | – | LiveBench | |
| AA-Omniscience | 40.5#16 | 42.2#10 | 43.7#2 | 43.4#4 | 43.4#5 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| PRBench Financeeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 47.5%#16 | Scale AI SEAL | |
| PRBench Legaleffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 48.4%#17 | Scale AI SEAL | |
| BioMysteryBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 79.3%#3 | – | Vals AI | |
| Excel Modeling Benchmarknot in index | – | – | – | – | 71.7%#11 | – | Vals AI | |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1not in index | – | – | – | – | 72.7%#7 | – | Vals AI | |
| MedCodenot in index | – | – | – | – | 48.5%#29 | – | Vals AI | |
| MedScribenot in index | – | – | – | – | 87.9%#16 | – | Vals AI | |
| DrugDiscoveryBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 68.7%#1 | – | Scale AI SEAL | |
| EBR-benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 76.2%#1 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| GDP.pdfnot in index | – | – | – | – | 34.2%#2 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracynot in index | 59.5%#21 | 60.6%#18 | 61.1%#14 | 61.9%#13 | 62.6%#11 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationnot in index | 53.1%#105 | 53.5%#104 | 55.2%#97 | 51.7%#109 | 48.7%#124 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Instruction following
| Benchmark | max | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Languagenot in index | 89.4%#4 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Instruction Followingnot in index | 75.6%#8 | LiveBench | |
| Arena Instruction Followingnot in index | 1473#30 | Arena (LMArena) |
Human preference
| Benchmark | max | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arena Text | 1477#32 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Creative Writingnot in index | 1450#39 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Multi-turnnot in index | 1485#30 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Longer Queriesnot in index | 1489#28 | Arena (LMArena) |
Multimodal
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arena Vision | – | – | – | – | 1280#36 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench Designnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 82.0%#11 | LiveBench | |
| MMMU-Pro | 84.6%#18 | 85.1%#11 | 86.4%#4 | 86.2%#5 | 86.9%#2 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| SAGEnot in index | – | – | – | – | 46.4%#36 | – | Vals AI | |
| Blueprint-Bench 2not in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 49.7%#3 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| AA-3Dnot in index | – | – | – | – | 1166#3 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Long context
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | max | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA-LCR | 80.0%#78 | 79.7%#88 | 80.0%#78 | 80.0%#78 | 80.7%#65 | Artificial Analysis | |
| Arena Documentnot in index | – | – | – | – | 1473#17 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| MLCRnot in index | 33.9%#8 | 38.3%#3 | 32.8%#10 | 36.1%#5 | 41.7%#1 | Artificial Analysis |
Composite
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Indexnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 168.8#2 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LiveBench 2.0effort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 86.1%#3 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0not in index | – | – | – | – | 82.2%#4 | – | LiveBench | |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 45.8#35 | 49.6#23 | 50.9#18 | 52.4#11 | 52.7#9 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Vals Indexnot in index | – | – | – | – | 65.0#5 | – | Vals AI | |
| Vals Finance Indexnot in index | – | – | – | – | 55.6%#20 | – | Vals AI | |
| Vals RSI Indexnot in index | – | – | – | – | 27.1%#6 | – | Vals AI | |
| Vals Science Indexnot in index | – | – | – | – | 65.1%#1 | – | Vals AI | |
| Vals Router Indexnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | – | 65.0%#4 | Vals AI | |
| AA Cyber Indexnot in index | – | – | – | – | 33.4#14 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Where it wins
Benchmarks where this configuration ranks in the top five of every configuration measured.
- #1FrontierMath Tiers 1–393.7% · of 118
- #1OTIS Mock AIME100.0% · of 276
- #1IOI100.0% · of 43
- #1ARC-AGI-295.0% · of 256
- #2GPQA Diamond95.8% · of 293
- #2FrontierMath Tier 497.6% · of 74
- #2SimpleQA Verified75.6% · of 87
- #2WeirdML93.3% · of 156
- #2Arena WebDev1775 · of 138
- #2Arena Agent14.7 · of 50
- #2MMMU-Pro86.9% · of 282
- #2Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)87.3% · of 73
- #2ARC-AGI-398.6% · of 69
- #2DeepSec-Bench (AA)36.9% · of 21
- #3CritPt31.7% · of 555
- #4FrontierCode53.3% · of 45
- #5AA-Omniscience43.4 · of 552
- #5CWE-Bench (AA)63.3% · of 20
Where to run it
Every provider serving this model through OpenRouter, with throughput and first-token latency measured on live traffic over the last 30 minutes and each provider’s own price. Purple marks the best in each column.
| Provider | Speed | First token | Input $/M | Output $/M | Context | Quantisation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OpenAI | 119 tok/s | 3.02 s | $60.00 | $300.00 | 1.1M | – |
| OpenAI | 66 tok/s | 2.35 s | $20.00 | $100.00 | 1.1M | – |
| OpenAI | 59 tok/s | 6.32 s | $5.00 | $25.00 | 1.1M | – |
| OpenAI | 40 tok/s | 4.56 s | $10.00 | $50.00 | 1.1M | – |
| Azure | 36 tok/s | 6.70 s | $10.00 | $50.00 | 1.1M | – |
What a task costs
Estimates from list price, output speed and time to first answer for the best configuration. “With caching” assumes three-quarters of the input is served from the prompt cache at $1.00 per 1M. Reasoning tokens are not modelled.
| Workload | Tokens in / out | Cost | With caching | Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chat reply | 400 / 300 | $0.019 | $0.016 | 4.2 min |
| Summarize a 30-page report | 12,000 / 600 | $0.150 | $0.069 | 4.3 min |
| Code edit | 6,000 / 1,500 | $0.135 | $0.095 | 4.5 min |
| Agentic coding session | 60,000 / 4,000 | $0.800 | $0.395 | 5.3 min |
| Structured extraction | 2,000 / 200 | $0.030 | $0.017 | 4.2 min |
More from OpenAI
Compare GPT-6 Astra with…
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 4 Argon
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Wonder Full
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Fable 5.1
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Fable 5
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 5
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Wonder
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark 1.3
- GPT-6 Astra vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-6 Sol
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.5 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.4
- GPT-6 Astra vs Kimi K3
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.6 Terra
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark
- GPT-6 Astra vs Grok 4.6
- GPT-6 Astra vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
- GPT-6 Astra vs Grok 4.7
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.3-Codex
- GPT-6 Astra vs GLM 5.3
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.8 Max
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 4.7
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 4.8
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.4 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark 1.2
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 4.6
- GPT-6 Astra vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark 1.1
- GPT-6 Astra vs GLM 5.2
- GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.6 Max
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3.6 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark Open
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Haiku 5.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.2
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.7
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs Step 5 Preview
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Sonnet 5
- GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-6 Luna
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 4.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.6 Luna
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424
- GPT-6 Astra vs o3
- GPT-6 Astra vs DeepSeek V4 Flash
See also
Questions people ask
- What are GPT-6 Astra's benchmark scores?
- As of 24 Oct 2026, GPT-6 Astra (max effort) scores 70.4 ±3.8 on the BenchLeader Index, top 10, strongest in composite (88) and weakest in agents & tools (64). That rests on 30 independent benchmark results, and every score on this page links to its publisher.
- How does GPT-6 Astra rank?
- GPT-6 Astra (max effort) is #5 of 785 ranked configurations on 24 Oct 2026 (top 10). 43 other configurations score within its margin, so the exact position matters less than the band. The leader is Claude Opus 5.5 (max effort) at 72.6.
- How much does GPT-6 Astra cost per 1M tokens?
- As of 24 Oct 2026, GPT-6 Astra costs $10.00 per 1M input tokens and $50.00 per 1M output tokens, $20.00 blended (three input tokens per output token).
- Is GPT-6 Astra better than Claude Fable 5.1?
- As of 24 Oct 2026, Claude Fable 5.1 (max) and GPT-6 Astra (max) are neck and neck on quality (70.5 vs 70.4, inside the ±6.1 margin of error) and close on price, so pick on the category that matters to you. The head-to-head page has the benchmark-by-benchmark detail.
- When was GPT-6 Astra released?
- OpenAI released GPT-6 Astra on 2 Sept 2026. BenchLeader has results for it at 7 reasoning-effort settings.
Data as of 24 Oct 2026. Compare these configurations.
Cite as: BenchLeader, “GPT-6 Astra: benchmarks, pricing, speed and rank”, data as of 24 Oct 2026, https://www.benchleader.com/models/gpt-6-astra.