Model comparison
gpt-oss-20b vs Ring-2.6-1T
gpt-oss-20b has enough public results to be ranked (#249); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. gpt-oss-20b scores higher in 0 categories and Ring-2.6-1T in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Ring-2.6-1T leads 25.3 to 18.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 34.4% for gpt-oss-20b and 42.4% for Ring-2.6-1T.
Side by side
| gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 32.1 | 36.3 |
| Released | 2025-08-05 | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 16K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.018 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.09 | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Ring-2.6-1T leads
gpt-oss-20b: 37.1 (#185), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 34.4% | 42.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 566.05 | 432.57 |
| WeirdML | 40.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1307 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
gpt-oss-20b: 9.2 (#146), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 3.4% | — |
Reasoning Ring-2.6-1T leads
gpt-oss-20b: 18.8 (#251), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 1.4% | 3.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1274 | — |
| DTBench | 68% | — |
| LMCA | 14.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 137.81 | — |
Math Not comparable
gpt-oss-20b: 37.6 (#93), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 65.3% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 56.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1317 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
gpt-oss-20b: 34.6 (#186), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 60.8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 74% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 59.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1258 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
gpt-oss-20b: 42.4 (#192), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1269 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1311 | — |
| LMArena German | 1249 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1245 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1239 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1279 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1267 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
gpt-oss-20b: 62.0 (#235), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 73.2% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1236 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
gpt-oss-20b: 37.9 (#203), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1251 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
gpt-oss-20b: 35.8 (#260), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1288 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1201 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 666 | — |
| WildBench | 73.7% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1268 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is gpt-oss-20b better than Ring-2.6-1T?
gpt-oss-20b has enough public results to be ranked (#249); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is gpt-oss-20b or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do gpt-oss-20b and Ring-2.6-1T share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. gpt-oss-20b has 34 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.