New Sign up free, 10 calls on us. Up to $1, no card needed.

GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra

vs

Which one, when

Both gpt-5.6-sol and gpt-6-astra share identical 1050000 context windows, 128000 maximum outputs, and the exact same modalities and reasoning capabilities. Choose gpt-5.6-sol to minimize costs, as its $5 input and $30 output rates are strictly lower than the $10 input and $50 output rates of gpt-6-astra. Pick gpt-6-astra if your application specifically requires its 2026-04 knowledge cutoff over the 2026-02 cutoff of gpt-5.6-sol.

Benchmarks

Above averageNo peer higherGPT-5.6 Sol90 / 10935 / 109GPT-6 Astraonly 4 comparable
GPT-5.6 Sol GPT-6 Astra other models measured peer average no peer scored higher
SWE-Bench Pro
64.6%
N/A
BioMysteryBench hard
44.7%
N/A
OSWorld-Verified
83%
N/A
Cybergym
83.6%
N/A
HealthBench
57%
58.1%
Finance Agent v2
53.8%
N/A
Harvey Lab-AA
87.2%
N/A
GPQA Diamond
no peer scored higher 94.6%
N/A
BrowseComp
90.4%
N/A
LVBench
82.1%
N/A

Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

Pricing

GPT-5.6 Sol GPT-6 Astra Δ
Input / 1M tokens $5 $10 0.5×
Output / 1M tokens $30 $50 0.6×
Cache read / 1M tokens $0.5 $1 0.5×
Cache write no separate charge no separate charge -

Rates from the live catalog at build time; each model page carries the current card.

Where they sit - input price per 1M tokens across all 68 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)

GPT-5.6 Sol · $5 GPT-6 Astra · $10
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

Capabilities

GPT-5.6 Sol GPT-6 Astra
Tool use yes yes
Thinking control configurable configurable
Structured output yes yes
Prompt caching implicit (automatic) implicit (automatic)
Cache lifetime 5-10m, up to 1h 5-10m, up to 1h
Minimum cached prefix 1024 tokens 1024 tokens

Specs

GPT-5.6 Sol GPT-6 Astra
Input modalities text image text image
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-07-09 2026-09-03
Knowledge cutoff 2026-02 2026-04
Context window 1.1M 1.1M
Max output 128K 128K
Thinking parameter reasoning.effort reasoning.effort
Accepted values
reasoning.effort
  • none
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
reasoning.effort
  • none
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
Default medium medium

Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: GPT-5.6 Sol · GPT-6 Astra

One prompt, both models - measured through the gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. CHECK exactly 3 sentences

GPT-5.6 Sol passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model generate additional internal tokens before producing an answer, so each request consumes more billable compute. Reasoning may also increase response length, latency, tool calls, and retries, further raising per-request cost. In short, usage volume may be unchanged, but the cost per task increased enough to double the bill.

out 111 tok (+34 thinking) latency 2.3 s

GPT-6 Astra passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model do more work per request, often generating internal reasoning tokens that are billed even though they do not appear in the final answer. If traffic, model choice, and pricing stayed the same, those extra tokens likely explain why our bill doubled—not longer answers or more users. We should verify the usage breakdown, then reserve higher reasoning levels for tasks where improved results justify the added cost.

out 283 tok (+196 thinking) latency 17.2 s

Instruction following (exactly three sentences - countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. CHECK fix passes tests

GPT-5.6 Sol passed · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The original function counted equal *adjacencies* rather than items, so a run of length one produced `0` and every longer run was undercounted by one. Initializing `cur` and `best` to `1` for nonempty input makes them represent item counts, resetting `cur` to `1` starts a new run at the current item, and updating `best` on every iteration ensures a run reaching the final index is included.

out 316 tok (+135 thinking) latency 5.2 s

GPT-6 Astra passed · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The original code counts equal adjacent pairs rather than items, so every nonempty run is undercounted by one: a single-element input returns `0`, and a run of three equal items returns `2`. Starting and resetting `cur` to `1` counts the first item of each run, while the empty-input check preserves a result of `0`. Updating `best` after each iteration includes runs ending at the last index without needing a final flush; the original also updated during trailing runs, but undercounted them.

out 321 tok (+131 thinking) latency 13.5 s

Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. CHECK valid JSON, schema exact

GPT-5.6 Sol passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":"11+","guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}

out 194 tok (+147 thinking) latency 3.2 s

GPT-6 Astra passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Formal guidance is withheld pending the "

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": "eleven and change", "guidance": "Formal guidance is withheld pending the Q4 close." }

out 329 tok (+267 thinking) latency 16.9 s

Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. CHECK 120 words, 0 banned words

GPT-5.6 Sol passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today, we’re introducing Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that reuses prompt prefixes across supported AI providers, reducing latency, token costs, and duplicated processing. Teams can define cache policies once, route requests dynamically, and preserve provider flexibility without rewriting application logic. Switching models during testing or failover? The gateway identifies eligible prompt segments, applies provider-specific caching controls, and reports hits, misses, savings, and expiration details through unified logs and metrics. Configurable TTLs, tenant isolation, encryption, and cache-bypass options help teams balance performance, privacy, and freshness for every workload. Provider Prompt Cache is available today in beta through the dashboard and API, with SDK examples and migration guidance included. […]

out 733 tok (+564 thinking) latency 7.7 s

GPT-6 Astra passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing Cross Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that reuses eligible prompt content across supported AI providers. Why pay to process the same context every time? Configure caching once at the gateway, then route requests between models while keeping shared instructions, reference material, and conversation prefixes ready for reuse. Caching controls let teams set expiration windows, isolate tenants, and exclude sensitive content. Cache analytics show hit rates, estimated savings, and latency trends, helping developers tune performance with confidence. Existing routing policies continue to work, so adoption fits your current architecture. Start with a single application, measure the results, and expand as needed. Available today in the dashboard and API, with documentation and examples to guide your first deployment.

out 665 tok (+516 thinking) latency 19.3 s

Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.

Switch between them with one line

Both ids are in every tab below - the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="gpt-5.6-sol",
    # model="gpt-6-astra",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get your API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Sol or GPT-6 Astra?

GPT-5.6 Sol is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($5 vs $10, 2.0× apart). Other rows may point the other way - the table above carries the full card, and real cost depends on your mix.

Can I A/B test GPT-5.6 Sol against GPT-6 Astra without two integrations?

Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key - switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.

Do GPT-5.6 Sol and GPT-6 Astra support prompt caching?

Yes - both bill cached reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.

Related comparisons

From our measured studies