LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Hy3

Updated October 21, 2026. 37 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI
Coding
88.7
Overall
51.8
Output $/M
$10.00
34
Hy3Tencent
Coding
43.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.528
3
vs boards won of 37 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for coding: it scores 88.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 43.9 for Hy3.

Pick Hy3 when output tokens cost 18.9x less, or when what matters is LMArena Text: science or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.

Shared results
37
GPT-6.1 Sol only
58
Hy3 only
7
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-6.1 Sol 88.7 from 2 benchmarks, Hy3 43.9 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Coding, 20.5 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: GPT-6.1 Sol 2743.8 against Hy3 838.6, 63.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-6.1 Sol $10.00 against Hy3 $0.528 per million output tokens, 18.9x apart.
Context window
GPT-6.1 Sol takes 1.05M tokens, Hy3 262K.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-6.1 SolBarsHy3Ties
Coding70
Reasoning40
Math20
Knowledge22
Web design60
General131
All shared boards343
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index70
Coding benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
LiveBench coding96.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev17531507GPT-6.1 Sol
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)55.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)88.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Code migration (Vals AI)65.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)3.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
IOI (Vals AI)96.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)43.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)39.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SciCode55.8%48.6%GPT-6.1 Sol
FrontierCode50.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ALE-Bench2743.8838.6GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: coding14781466GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: software and IT14761463GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev: React17541511GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev: HTML18001487GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev: from an image1702Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
AA Intelligence Index51.8Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Epoch Capabilities Index168.4Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1190Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1250Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench research83.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench browser88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench long agentic73.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SREBench (Vals AI)50.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)52.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)21.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)38.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)70.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)52.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vals Science Index59.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)28.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
APEX-Agents60.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SpireClimb24.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
LiveBench reasoning92.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)46.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured89.7%Only Hy3 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)52.9%33.5%GPT-6.1 Sol
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)95.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ARC-AGI98.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ARC-AGI-294.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Chess puzzles68.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Mystery game puzzles80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
EBR-bench54.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14631447GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: expert14891461GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14651455GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision: diagrams1306Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: homework1356Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 393.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tier 4100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ProofBench99.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: math14891473GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: mathematical work15131482GPT-6.1 Sol
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
MedCode (Vals AI)48.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SimpleQA Verified73.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: science14441457Hy3
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14331452Hy3
LMArena Text: legal and government14711422GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: business and finance14451424GPT-6.1 Sol
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
Design Arena: websites13211230GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: UI components13211205GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: game dev13891208GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: data viz12781163GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: 3D14611233GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: all code categories13451227GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1199Only Hy3 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1157Only Hy3 measured
LiveBench design82.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index131
General benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
Vals Index63.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench data analysis82.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)59.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SAGE (Vals AI)46.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)86.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.0%79.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
DTBench96.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMCA62.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Furniture assembly80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text14431438GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: instruction following14661426GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: creative writing14251403GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision1288Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: English14501448GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: non-English14331426GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: Chinese14871485GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1449Only Hy3 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1397Only Hy3 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1396Only Hy3 measured
LMArena Text: French14601456GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: Spanish14391457Hy3
LMArena Text: Russian14571432GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1447Only Hy3 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14421436GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: longer queries14581442GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: writing and language14441414GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14261400GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision: English1274Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1289Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1301Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolHy3Leader
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

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.0070Fits in one request
Hy3$0.0004Fits in one request

Hy3 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.130Fits in one request
Hy3$0.0082Fits in one request

Hy3 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.500Fits in one request
Hy3$0.032Fits in one request

Hy3 costs less

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.

Specifications of GPT-6.1 Sol and Hy3
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-6.1 SolTencent Hy3
MakerOpenAITencent
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 29, 2026July 6, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.132
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.528
Coding index88.743.9
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than Hy3 for coding?

Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for coding: it scores 88.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 43.9 for Hy3. Pick Hy3 when output tokens cost 18.9x less, or when what matters is LMArena Text: science or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Sol or Hy3?

GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Hy3 costs $0.132 and $0.528. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-6.1 Sol or Hy3?

GPT-6.1 Sol, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-6.1 Sol vs Hy3 comparison based on?

37 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-6.1 Sol's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Hy3's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next