# GPT-5.6 Sol vs Jamba Large

> GPT-5.6 Sol has enough public results to be ranked (#6); Jamba Large does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-6-sol-vs-jamba-large
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher in 2 categories and Jamba Large in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.6 Sol leads 74.7 to 17.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 67% for GPT-5.6 Sol and 26.1% for Jamba Large.
- Jamba Large is cheaper at $2 / $8 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for GPT-5.6 Sol.
- GPT-5.6 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 256K.
- Jamba Large has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | AI21 Labs |
| Noometry Index | 64.4 | 32.6 |
| Rank | 6 | — |
| Context | 1.05M | 256K |
| Input $/M | $4 | $2 |
| Output $/M | $20 | $8 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 61.1 (#7)
- Jamba Large: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 72.7% | — |
| FrontierCode | 47.5% | — |
| CursorBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1619 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 32.2% | — |
| SciCode | 57.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 89.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1493 | — |
| MirrorCode | 20% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,177 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 50.2 (#7)
- Jamba Large: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 51.4% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 27.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 46.9% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 36.2% | — |
| BALROG | 60% | — |
| GBAEval | 52.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30.7% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1257 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,619 | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 74.7 (#6)
- Jamba Large: 17.4

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 67% | 26.1% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 92.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 71.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 93.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 32.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 64% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 37.1% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 44.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| DTBench | 96% | — |
| LMCA | 59.2% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 93.1% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 161.99 | — |

## Math

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 85.5 (#7)
- Jamba Large: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 89.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 82.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 83% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1472 | — |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 64.3 (#16)
- Jamba Large: 37.0

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.4% | 9.7% |
| GPQA Diamond | 93.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 69.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1517 | — |

## Multimodal

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 48.9 (#8)
- Jamba Large: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1281 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 33.6% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 56.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1483 | — |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 55.4 (#32)
- Jamba Large: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1450 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1523 | — |
| LMArena French | 1475 | — |
| LMArena German | 1476 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1475 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1466 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1449 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 77.8 (#16)
- Jamba Large: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1480 | — |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 45.3 (#42)
- Jamba Large: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.6 Sol: 73.5 (#12)
- Jamba Large: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1456 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1450 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1972 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1250 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.6 Sol better than Jamba Large?

GPT-5.6 Sol has enough public results to be ranked (#6); Jamba Large does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Sol or Jamba Large?

Jamba Large is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $8 per million output tokens; GPT-5.6 Sol lists at $4 and $20.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.6 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 256K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.6 Sol and Jamba Large share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.6 Sol has 64 scored results on Noometry and Jamba Large has 2.