Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Sol vs Ornith-1.0-35B
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.6 Sol #3 (Supported); Ornith-1.0-35B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.6 Sol and Ornith-1.0-35B share 3 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 43 results are unique to GPT-5.6 Sol; 4 to Ornith-1.0-35B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- GPT-5.6 Sol only
- 43
- Ornith-1.0-35B only
- 4
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. GPT-5.6 Sol makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; Ornith-1.0-35B is the better fit if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.6 Sol and Ornith-1.0-35B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
GPT-5.6 Sol is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Ornith-1.0-35B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. GPT-5.6 Sol gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Ornith-1.0-35B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | GPT-5.6 Sol | Δ | Ornith-1.0-35B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | GPT-5.6 Sol92.0 | Margin← 27.8 | Ornith-1.0-35B64.2 |
| Coding | GPT-5.6 Sol64.6 | Margin→ 1.3 | Ornith-1.0-35B65.9 |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.6 Sol94.6 | MarginNo overlap | Ornith-1.0-35BNot measured |
| Math | GPT-5.6 Sol87.5 | MarginNo overlap | Ornith-1.0-35BNot measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.6 Sol83.0 | MarginNo overlap | Ornith-1.0-35BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 91.9%B 64.2%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 27.7Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.6 Sol scored 91.9%; Ornith-1.0-35B scored 64.2%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 64.6%B 50.4%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 14.2SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.6 Sol scored 64.6%; Ornith-1.0-35B scored 50.4%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Sol | Ornith-1.0-35B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.6 Sol$5 input / $30 output | Ornith-1.0-35B$0 input / $0 output | Ornith-1.0-35B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | Ornith-1.0-35BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | Ornith-1.0-35BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.6 Sol1M | Ornith-1.0-35B256K | GPT-5.6 Sol lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.6 Sol wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 91.9% | 64.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 62.6% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 84.5% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 33.7% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 58% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 54.0% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 85.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 61.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1736 | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1501 | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 56.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 33.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 51.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 87.2% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 65.9% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 88% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 69.8% | Not comparable |
CodingOrnith-1.0-35B wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 64.6% | 50.4% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 91.9% | 64.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| deepSweSource | 72.7% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | 60.6% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 67.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VulcanBench v3Source | 87.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 77.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 56.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 75.6% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 69.3% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 34.6% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 94.6% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 60.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 33.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 58.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 94.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 47.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 21.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 58.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 88.8% | — | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 72.7% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, GPT-5.6 Sol or Ornith-1.0-35B?
GPT-5.6 Sol and Ornith-1.0-35B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.6 Sol or Ornith-1.0-35B?
Ornith-1.0-35B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 65.9 versus 64.6. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.6 Sol or Ornith-1.0-35B?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 92 versus 64.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.