Model comparison
GPT-5.1 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 49.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.1 scores higher in 3 categories and GPT-6.1 Sol in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 81.9 to 39.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 17.6% for GPT-5.1 and 94.2% for GPT-6.1 Sol.
- GPT-5.1 is cheaper at $1.25 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for GPT-6.1 Sol.
- GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 400K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 49.0 | 65.6 |
| Released | 2025-11-13 | 2026-09-29 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $10 |
| Results tracked | 63 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-5.1: 46.4 (#66), GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.2 (#8)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1395 | 1755 |
| SciCode | 43.3% | 55.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1487 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 68% | — |
| DeepSWE | — | 75.2% |
| FrontierCode | — | 50.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | — |
| GSO | 13.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 60.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 72.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,192 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-5.1: 32.7 (#60), GPT-6.1 Sol: 39.6 (#26)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 47.6% | — |
| APEX-Agents | — | 60% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 32% |
| LMArena Search | 1199 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,473 | — |
Reasoning GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-5.1: 39.8 (#58), GPT-6.1 Sol: 81.9 (#2)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 17.6% | 94.2% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 72.8% | 98.5% |
| CritPt | 4.9% | 31.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 32% | 61% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 1466 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | 80% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.64 | 166.09 |
| SimpleBench | 53.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 95.5% |
| EnigmaEval | 11.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 54.3% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 95.8% | — |
| DTBench | 90.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 72.1% | — |
| LMCA | 43.9% | — |
| ForecastBench | 58.1 | — |
| LiveBench | 78.8% | — |
Math GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-5.1: 52.2 (#51), GPT-6.1 Sol: 93.7 (#1)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 88.6% | 100% |
| LMArena Math | 1447 | 1464 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 93.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 100% |
| ProofBench | — | 99% |
| Omni-MATH | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 94.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 31% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-5.1: 50.6 (#71), GPT-6.1 Sol: 71.8 (#4)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 87.6% | 95.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 48% | 73.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1470 | 1502 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 23.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 57.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 44.2% | — |
Multimodal GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-5.1: 44.8 (#19), GPT-6.1 Sol: 52.7 (#5)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1250 | 1288 |
| VPCT | 58.7% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 80% |
| LMArena Document | 1403 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-5.1: 53.8 (#56), GPT-6.1 Sol: 54.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1431 | 1438 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1477 |
| LMArena Russian | 1435 | 1455 |
| LMArena French | 1450 | — |
| LMArena German | 1438 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1453 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1433 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-5.1 leads
GPT-5.1: 83.9 (#1), GPT-6.1 Sol: 77.0 (#29)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1443 | 1468 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 93.3% | — |
| IFEval | 93.5% | — |
Long Context GPT-5.1 leads
GPT-5.1: 47.6 (#14), GPT-6.1 Sol: 44.9 (#54)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1447 | 1465 |
| CL-bench | 23.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 17.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
GPT-5.1: 64.5 (#55), GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.6 (#63)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1443 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1427 | 1432 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1450 | 1449 |
| WildBench | 86.3% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 80.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.1 better than GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 49.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1 or GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-5.1 is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol lists at $2 and $10.
Is GPT-5.1 or GPT-6.1 Sol better for coding?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 63.2 versus 46.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6.1 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1 and GPT-6.1 Sol share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1 has 63 scored results on Noometry and GPT-6.1 Sol has 34.