Gemini 4 Carbon vs GPT-6.1 Sol
Gemini 4 Carbon leads GPT-6.1 Sol on coding, 86.6 to 79.8 on the Vibe Coding Index, at about the same output price ($10.00 vs $10.00 per million). Updated November 14, 2026; 71 benchmarks have a result for both.
vs boards won of 71 shared, 3 tied
Gemini 4 Carbon or GPT-6.1 Sol: which to pick
Pick Gemini 4 Carbon for coding: it scores 86.6 on the Vibe Coding Index against 79.8 for GPT-6.1 Sol, though on 4 benchmarks against 5.
Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for a larger context window (1.05M against 1.05M tokens) and work measured by FrontierCode 2.0 or ALE-Bench, where it leads.
Model AGemini 4 CarbonGoogle86.6/1004 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved taskModel BGPT-6.1 SolOpenAI79.8/1005 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task
- Shared results
- 71
- Gemini 4 Carbon only
- 2
- GPT-6.1 Sol only
- 58
- Like-for-like categories
- 8 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
Gemini 4 Carbon
Gemini 4 Carbon scores 86.6 against 79.8.
4 and 5 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Gemini 4 Carbon
Gemini 4 Carbon leads, 60.0 against 54.6.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Gemini 4 Carbon
Gemini 4 Carbon leads, 1319 against 1316.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
Gemini 4 Carbon
Gemini 4 Carbon leads, 70.5% against 63.9%.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol takes 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
No call
Gemini 4 Carbon $0.0070, GPT-6.1 Sol $0.0070 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 4 Carbon 86.6 from 4 benchmarks, GPT-6.1 Sol 79.8 from 5 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 15.1 points apart on average over 10 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- EBR-bench: Gemini 4 Carbon 87.6% against GPT-6.1 Sol 54.3%, 33.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Both cost $10.00 per million output tokens.
- Context window
- Gemini 4 Carbon takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-6.1 Sol 1.05M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Gemini 4 Carbon | Bars | GPT-6.1 Sol | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 8 | 3 | ||
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 8 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 8 | 3 | 2 ties | |
| Math | 2 | 2 | 1 tie | |
| Knowledge | 8 | 0 | ||
| Web design | 4 | 2 | ||
| General | 14 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 54 | 14 | 3 ties |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index83
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 91.0% | 82.1% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena WebDev | 1768 | 1743 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 63.1% | 55.0% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 89.1% | 88.9% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 65.1% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 3.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | Not measured | 96.9% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | Not measured | 43.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 39.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 55.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Artificial Analysis run) | 65.2% | 56.1% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| FrontierCode 2.0 | 40.6% | 40.6% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| FrontierCode | Not measured | 50.2% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| FrontierSWE | 61.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 4 Carbon measured |
| MirrorCode | Not measured | 61.1% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ALE-Bench | 2374.7 | 2743.8 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1564 | 1486 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1552 | 1478 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1792 | 1747 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1770 | 1794 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | Not measured | 1696 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 9.2% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SWE-Bench Pro V2 | Not measured | 96.1% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| GameBench 2 | Not measured | 92.0 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | Not measured | 58.2% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| CursorBench 4.0 | 60.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 4 Carbon measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 60.0 | 54.6 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 169.8 | 168.5 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index82
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1277 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1284 | 1229 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1190 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: agents building games | Not measured | 1195 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | Not measured | 1485 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: PowerPoint slides | Not measured | 1304 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: spreadsheets | 1224 | 1378 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LiveBench research | 92.5% | 90.0% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LiveBench browser | 80.0% | 93.3% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LiveBench long agentic | 72.7% | 65.6% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 51.8% | 21.8% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 55.8% | 38.5% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 17.5% | 6.3% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 79.6% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.9% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Vals Science Index | Not measured | 59.6% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Robo-bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 28.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| APEX-Agents | 84.2% | 60.0% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| PostTrainBench | Not measured | 38.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SpireClimb | Not measured | 23.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $16,484 | $12,861 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Search | Not measured | 1230 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index83
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 90.6% | 92.6% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | Not measured | 46.4% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 52.9% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| HLE-Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 69.1% | 58.8% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| CritPt v2, hard subset (Artificial Analysis run) | 69.0% | 69.5% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 96.5% | 95.4% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| ARC-AGI | 98.5% | 98.5% | Tie |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 94.2% | 94.2% | Tie |
| SimpleBench | 92.6% | 82.9% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Chess puzzles | 78.0% | 68.0% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Mystery game puzzles | 73.0% | 80.0% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| EBR-bench | 87.6% | 54.3% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1551 | 1466 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1582 | 1498 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1545 | 1472 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1312 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1353 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| GoBench | Not measured | 2378 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 100.0% | 100.0% | Tie |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 90.5% | 93.7% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 95.1% | 100.0% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 99.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1475 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1538 | 1498 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| MathArena | 85.4% | 80.6% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index80
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 48.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| AA-Omniscience | 53.5 | 42.4 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| SimpleQA Verified | 77.7% | 73.9% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: science | 1535 | 1457 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1525 | 1429 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1542 | 1472 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1520 | 1441 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | 78.4% | 76.8% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| PRBench Finance | Not measured | 46.2% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| PRBench Legal | 53.3% | 47.9% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index42
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1319 | 1316 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1357 | 1353 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1326 | 1407 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1276 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1434 | 1426 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1348 | 1361 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1343 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench design | 80.2% | 79.6% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index142
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 70.5% | 63.9% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LiveBench data analysis | 86.5% | 82.7% | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 59.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 90.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 86.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 79.3% | 84.0% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| GDPval-AA | 1733 | 1607 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| DTBench | Not measured | 96.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 62.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Furniture assembly | 77.5% | 80.0% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text | 1538 | 1445 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1539 | 1463 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1533 | 1420 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1286 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1530 | 1451 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1534 | 1435 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1613 | 1501 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1449 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1427 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1442 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1449 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1439 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1560 | 1452 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1446 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1569 | 1449 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1549 | 1459 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1542 | 1440 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1527 | 1421 | Gemini 4 Carbon |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1280 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1340 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1291 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1272 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1292 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| MultiChallenge | Not measured | 82.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| EQ-Bench 4 | Not measured | 1272 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 4 Carbon | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemini 4 Carbon$0.0070Fits in one request
GPT-6.1 Sol$0.0070Fits in one request
Same cost
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Gemini 4 Carbon$0.130Fits in one request
GPT-6.1 Sol$0.130Fits in one request
Same cost
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Gemini 4 Carbon$0.500Fits in one request
GPT-6.1 Sol$0.500Fits in one request
Same cost
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Google Gemini 4 Carbon | OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | November 10, 2026 | September 29, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.00 | $2.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $10.00 |
| Coding index | 86.6 | 79.8 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 4 | 5 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Gemini 4 Carbon better than GPT-6.1 Sol for coding?
Pick Gemini 4 Carbon for coding: it scores 86.6 on the Vibe Coding Index against 79.8 for GPT-6.1 Sol, though on 4 benchmarks against 5. Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for a larger context window (1.05M against 1.05M tokens) and work measured by FrontierCode 2.0 or ALE-Bench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 4 Carbon or GPT-6.1 Sol?
Gemini 4 Carbon costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2.00 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 4 Carbon or GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 4 Carbon vs GPT-6.1 Sol comparison based on?
71 benchmarks have a result for both models as of November 14, 2026. Gemini 4 Carbon's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and GPT-6.1 Sol's on 5. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.