GPT-5.6 Terra vs gpt-oss-20b
At a Glance
| Compare |  GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | gpt-oss-20bOpenAI |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v4.4 | #10 of 5777.3 score · 3/3 sources · complete | #43 of 570.0 score · 1/3 sources · single-source provisional · missing LiveBench, ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 0.0–66.7 |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #23 of 27$0.266 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 27-model eligible cohort |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.9 | #16 of 2748.0 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 27-model eligible cohort |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $2.00Openai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.018Openrouter ↗ · Oct 19, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $12.00Openai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.090Openrouter ↗ · Oct 19, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,050K | 131K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-10-15-0ebb411abf00 · arena_rating · leader | 1,447.39100% of row best · rating · gpt-5.6-terra-xhigh; 95% CI [1443.15823569, 1451.62460535]; votes 43271; rank 58 | 1,287.4389% of row best · rating · gpt-oss-20b; 95% CI [1281.03637900, 1293.81371199]; votes 10419; rank 260 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 1 benchmark winNo overall winner | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | GPT-5.6 Terra | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | OpenAI | OpenAI |
| Family | Gpt 5 6 | Gpt Oss |
| Model | GPT-5.6 Terra | gpt-oss-20b |
| Version | GPT-5.6 Terra | gpt-oss-20b |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-02-16 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,050K | 131K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 20.9B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 3.6B |
| License | Unknown | apache-2.0 |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Openai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Groq (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Serverless, Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
GPT-5.6 Terra Capabilities
gpt-oss-20b Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | vs | GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Antigravity AgentGoogle DeepMind | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini Deep Research MaxGoogle DeepMind | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini Deep ResearchGoogle DeepMind | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
 Mistral-Small-4-119B-2603Mistral AI | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
GPT-5.4 MiniOpenAI | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | family variantsimage, text |
GPT-5.4 ProOpenAI | vs | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | family variantsimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
GPT-5.6 Terra vs gpt-oss-20b FAQs
Is GPT-5.6 Terra or gpt-oss-20b better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both GPT-5.6 Terra and gpt-oss-20b, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Terra or gpt-oss-20b?+
GPT-5.6 Terra is $2.00 and gpt-oss-20b is $0.018 per million tokens, so gpt-oss-20b is cheaper on this metric. GPT-5.6 Terra is $12.00 and gpt-oss-20b is $0.090 per million tokens, so gpt-oss-20b is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, GPT-5.6 Terra or gpt-oss-20b?+
GPT-5.6 Terra has the larger sourced context window. GPT-5.6 Terra supports 1,050,000 tokens and gpt-oss-20b supports 131,072 tokens.
Which performs better in benchmarks, GPT-5.6 Terra or gpt-oss-20b?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can GPT-5.6 Terra or gpt-oss-20b be self-hosted?+
gpt-oss-20b is documented as self-hostable; GPT-5.6 Terra is documented as not self-hostable. GPT-5.6 Terra is not marked open weight; gpt-oss-20b is open weight.
Can GPT-5.6 Terra and gpt-oss-20b understand images?+
GPT-5.6 Terra is documented with image input; gpt-oss-20b is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, GPT-5.6 Terra or gpt-oss-20b?+
GPT-5.6 Terra has a sourced maximum output of 128,000 tokens; gpt-oss-20b's maximum output is not reported. A larger limit cannot be determined.
Do GPT-5.6 Terra and gpt-oss-20b support reasoning and tool use?+
GPT-5.6 Terra: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. gpt-oss-20b: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, GPT-5.6 Terra or gpt-oss-20b?+
GPT-5.6 Terra has 2 sourced provider routes; gpt-oss-20b has 5, so gpt-oss-20b has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, GPT-5.6 Terra or gpt-oss-20b?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.