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 #4 of 775 on the BenchLeader Index at 70.6 ±3.7, in the top ten. The ± is the point: 41 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 (89) and lowest in agents & tools (65). At $20.00 per million tokens blended it is among the most expensive ranked models. Output speed of 64 tokens per second puts it slower than most, with a first answer in 328.5 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 19 Oct 2026.
- Blended price
- $20.00/M
- $10.00 in · $50.00 out
- Output speed
- 64 tok/s
- measured by Artificial Analysis
- First answer
- 328 s
- first token 4.00 s
- Context
- 1.1M
- Full answer
- 336 s
- median, reasoning included
- Cost per run
- $3.26
- one full Intelligence Index run
- Released
- 2 Sept 2026
- Overall index71
- Reasoning76
- Coding74
- Agents & tools65
- Maths72
- Knowledge79
- Human preference67
- Multimodal66
- Long context65
- Composite89
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 | #140 | 39 tok/s | 4.00 s | $0.019 | Coding 59 · Maths 70 · Reasoning 65 |
| low | 66.0 | #35 | 54 tok/s | 2.40 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 58 · Coding 60 · Composite 81 · Knowledge 80 · Long context 65 · Maths 72 · Multimodal 68 · Reasoning 76 |
| medium | 67.6 | #22 | 52 tok/s | 4.30 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 62 · Coding 60 · Composite 85 · Knowledge 81 · Long context 65 · Maths 77 · Multimodal 68 · Reasoning 79 |
| high | 69.7 | #8 | 55 tok/s | 64 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 65 · Coding 70 · Composite 87 · Knowledge 81 · Long context 65 · Maths 77 · Multimodal 70 · Reasoning 79 |
| xhigh | 69.0 | #14 | 59 tok/s | 159 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 67 · Coding 62 · Composite 88 · Knowledge 81 · Long context 65 · Maths 77 · Multimodal 70 · Reasoning 80 |
| maxbest | 70.6 | #4 | 64 tok/s | 328 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 65 · Coding 74 · Composite 89 · Human preference 67 · Knowledge 79 · Long context 65 · Maths 72 · Multimodal 66 · Reasoning 76 |
| not stated | 67.9 | #19 | 39 tok/s | 4.00 s | $0.019 | Agents & tools 71 · Coding 83 · Composite 70 · 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 +4.6 on the index — 2.3 points per doubling of spend. Compare that with other models.
How its index has moved
8 Sept 2026 to 21 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 | – | – | – | – | – | 1502#30 | – | 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%#29 | 52.7%#20 | 53.1%#17 | 54.6%#13 | 54.7%#12 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 86.0%#99 | 96.5%#23 | 97.5%#12 | 98.5%#1 | 98.5%#1 | 97.5%#12 | – | ARC Prize | |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 59.6%#85 | 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 | – | – | – | – | – | 1774#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%#68 | 54.2%#65 | 55.4%#50 | 55.7%#46 | 56.5%#36 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| IOI | – | – | – | – | – | 100.0%#1 | – | Vals AI | |
| Code Migrationnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 67.7%#3 | – | Vals AI | |
| ProgramBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | – | 5.5%#4 | – | 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%#4 | – | – | – | 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%#28 | 49.5%#19 | 54.0%#12 | 59.6%#2 | 59.1%#5 | – | 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%#7 | – | 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 | – | – | – | – | 15.1#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%#78 | 49.3%#53 | 51.1%#47 | 52.8%#41 | 53.6%#39 | – | 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%#32 | – | Vals AI | |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmarknot in index | – | – | – | – | 7.1%#17 | – | Vals AI | |
| Legal Research Benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 39.4%#31 | – | Vals AI | |
| SREBenchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 56.9%#1 | – | Vals AI | |
| Tax Agent Benchnot in index | – | – | – | – | 20.7%#44 | – | 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%#41 | 64.6%#19 | 66.6%#13 | 67.2%#9 | 68.5%#7 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| GDP.pdf (AA)not in index | 30.4%#9 | 30.4%#9 | 31.0%#5 | 32.2%#2 | 31.0%#5 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Harvey LAB-AA v1.1not in index | – | – | – | – | 8.6%#5 | – | Harvey | |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1not in index | – | 1461#36 | 1506#29 | 1547#22 | 1569#19 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)not in index | – | – | – | – | 63.3%#1 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| CWE-Bench (AA) | – | – | – | – | 63.3%#4 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| DeepSec-Bench (AA) | – | – | – | – | 36.9%#2 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| CyberGym end-to-end (AA) | – | – | – | – | 0.0%#16 | – | 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 | – | – | – | – | – | 1486#31 | – | 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%#10 | – | 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%#104 | 53.5%#103 | 55.2%#96 | 51.7%#108 | 48.7%#123 | – | 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#30 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Creative Writingnot in index | 1450#38 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Multi-turnnot in index | 1486#30 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Longer Queriesnot in index | 1489#30 | 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%#77 | 79.7%#87 | 80.0%#77 | 80.0%#77 | 80.7%#64 | Artificial Analysis | |
| Arena Documentnot in index | – | – | – | – | 1473#17 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| MLCRnot in index | – | – | – | – | 35.0%#17 | 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#34 | 49.6#22 | 50.9#17 | 52.4#10 | 52.7#8 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Vals Indexnot in index | – | – | – | – | 65.0#5 | – | Vals AI | |
| AA Cyber Indexnot in index | – | – | – | – | 33.4#12 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Where it wins
Benchmarks where this configuration ranks in the top five of every configuration measured.
- #1FrontierMath Tiers 1–393.7% · of 117
- #1OTIS Mock AIME100.0% · of 275
- #1IOI100.0% · of 42
- #1ARC-AGI-295.0% · of 241
- #2GPQA Diamond95.8% · of 291
- #2FrontierMath Tier 497.6% · of 73
- #2SimpleQA Verified75.6% · of 86
- #2WeirdML93.3% · of 156
- #2Arena WebDev1774 · of 136
- #2Arena Agent15.1 · of 50
- #2MMMU-Pro86.9% · of 281
- #2Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)87.3% · of 73
- #2ARC-AGI-398.6% · of 65
- #2DeepSec-Bench (AA)36.9% · of 19
- #3CritPt31.7% · of 550
- #4FrontierCode53.3% · of 45
- #4CWE-Bench (AA)63.3% · of 18
- #5AA-Omniscience43.4 · of 547
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 | 121 tok/s | 3.40 s | $60.00 | $300.00 | 1.1M | – |
| OpenAI | 72 tok/s | 3.19 s | $20.00 | $100.00 | 1.1M | – |
| OpenAI | 46 tok/s | 2.68 s | $5.00 | $25.00 | 1.1M | – |
| Azure | 41 tok/s | 9.34 s | $11.00 | $55.00 | 1.1M | – |
| OpenAI | 38 tok/s | 5.59 s | $10.00 | $50.00 | 1.1M | – |
| Azure | 36 tok/s | 7.38 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 | 5.6 min |
| Summarize a 30-page report | 12,000 / 600 | $0.150 | $0.069 | 5.6 min |
| Code edit | 6,000 / 1,500 | $0.135 | $0.095 | 5.9 min |
| Agentic coding session | 60,000 / 4,000 | $0.800 | $0.395 | 6.5 min |
| Structured extraction | 2,000 / 200 | $0.030 | $0.017 | 5.5 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 Sonnet 5.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Fable 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 GPT-6 Sol
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.5 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs Kimi K3
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.4
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.6 Terra
- GPT-6 Astra vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs Grok 4.6
- 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 GPT-5.4 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 4.7
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 4.8
- GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.8 Max
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark 1.2
- GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
- GPT-6 Astra vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark 1.1
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 4.6
- GPT-6 Astra vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- 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 Claude Haiku 5.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs Muse Spark Open
- GPT-6 Astra vs DeepSeek V4 Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3 7
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.2
- GPT-6 Astra vs Step 5 Preview
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 3 Pro
- 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 MiMo-V2.6-Flash
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5 Pro
- GPT-6 Astra vs o3
- GPT-6 Astra vs Kimi K2.6
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.2-Codex
See also
Data as of 21 Oct 2026. Compare these configurations.
Cite as: BenchLeader, “GPT-6 Astra: benchmarks, pricing, speed and rank”, https://www.benchleader.com/models/gpt-6-astra, data as of 21 Oct 2026.