GPT-5.6 Terra vs GPT-6 Astra
Which one, when
Both gpt-5.6-terra and gpt-6-astra provide identical 1050000 context windows, 128000 max output tokens, and support for the exact same capabilities and modalities. Choose gpt-5.6-terra for substantial cost savings, as its $2.5 input and $15 output rates are much lower than the $10 input and $50 output rates of gpt-6-astra. You should select gpt-6-astra only if your workload specifically requires its 2026-04 knowledge cutoff instead of the 2026-02 cutoff offered by gpt-5.6-terra.
Benchmarks
Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
Pricing
| GPT-5.6 Terra | GPT-6 Astra | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $2.5 | $10 | 0.25× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $15 | $50 | 0.3× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.25 | $1 | 0.25× |
| 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)
Capabilities
| GPT-5.6 Terra | 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 Terra | 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
| reasoning.effort
|
| 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 Terra · GPT-6 Astra
One prompt, both models - measured through the gateway
GPT-5.6 Terra passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning makes the model generate additional internal analysis tokens and perform more computation before producing the final answer, increasing usage per request. Those extra tokens are billed like other model output or are reflected in higher-priced reasoning-model rates, so even unchanged user traffic can cost substantially more. The bill doubled because average cost per request rose, likely from longer reasoning traces, more complex model routing, or both.
out 120 tok (+31 thinking) latency 2.4 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.
GPT-5.6 Terra passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 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 bug is that `cur` and `best` were counting adjacent *matches* rather than the number of items in a run: a run of one item has zero matching adjacent pairs, and a run of length `n` has only `n - 1` such pairs. Initializing both counters to `1` for a nonempty list and resetting `cur` to `1` when the value changes makes them represent actual run lengths. Updating `best` on every iteration also ensures a run that continues through the final element is included.
out 196 tok latency 2.6 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.
GPT-5.6 Terra passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"
{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":null,"guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}
out 149 tok (+103 thinking) latency 2.3 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.
GPT-5.6 Terra passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Today, our API gateway introduces cross-provider prompt caching, reducing repeated token processing while preserving your existing model routing. Teams can store reusable system prompts, policy blocks, and long context prefixes once, then serve them to supported providers with consistent cache keys and observability. The feature tracks hit rates, latency savings, and estimated cost reductions in the dashboard you already use for requests. Why pay to recompute identical context on every call? Configure cache policies by route, tenant, model, or TTL, and fall back automatically when a provider lacks compatible caching. Built-in controls help protect sensitive data through encryption, regional settings, and explicit expiration. Start with a single endpoint, compare results across providers, and scale prompt reuse without rewriting application logic.
out 631 tok (+475 thinking) latency 6.0 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-terra",
# 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)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "gpt-5.6-terra",
// model: "gpt-6-astra", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "gpt-5.6-terra",
# "model": "gpt-6-astra", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "gpt-5.6-terra",
// Model: "gpt-6-astra", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("gpt-5.6-terra")
// .model("gpt-6-astra") // uncomment this line, comment the one above
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Terra or GPT-6 Astra?
GPT-5.6 Terra is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($2.5 vs $10, 4.0× 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 Terra 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 Terra 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.