gpt-oss-20b vs Saba
gpt-oss-20b leads Saba on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.0 to 6.5, and gpt-oss-20b costs 4.0x less per output token ($0.15 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.
gpt-oss-20b or Saba: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick gpt-oss-20b for output tokens 4.0x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.60 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 33K tokens).
- Shared results
- 4
- gpt-oss-20b only
- 56
- Saba only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 3 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
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
gpt-oss-20b
gpt-oss-20b leads, 10.0 against 6.5.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only gpt-oss-20b has a GPQA Diamond result, 68.9%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only gpt-oss-20b has a AIME result, 86.0%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only gpt-oss-20b has a MMLU Pro result, 71.6%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only gpt-oss-20b has a Design Arena: websites result, 852.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
gpt-oss-20b
gpt-oss-20b takes 131K tokens against 33K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
gpt-oss-20b
gpt-oss-20b $0.0001, Saba $0.0005 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- gpt-oss-20b not benchmarked, Saba not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Reasoning, 16.6 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run): gpt-oss-20b 68.8% against Saba 42.4%, 26.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- gpt-oss-20b $0.15 against Saba $0.60 per million output tokens, 4.0x apart.
- Context window
- gpt-oss-20b takes 131K tokens, Saba 33K.
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 | gpt-oss-20b | Bars | Saba | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 4 | 0 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 80.4% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 77.7% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| SciCode | 38.9% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 10.6% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 3.4% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| WeirdML | 40.9% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| ALE-Bench | 566.0 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1307 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1311 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.0 | 6.5 | gpt-oss-20b |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 137.7 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 60.2% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 68.9% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 68.8% | 42.4% | gpt-oss-20b |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 11.0% | 4.3% | gpt-oss-20b |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 60.8% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1274 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1258 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1292 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 86.0% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 94.2% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 89.0% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| AA Math Index | 89.3 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 89.3% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 65.3% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1317 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1305 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 71.6% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 70.8% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 43.8% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 53.1% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 63.7% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 82.9% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 74.8% | 61.1% | gpt-oss-20b |
| LMArena Text: science | 1296 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1310 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1280 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1284 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 852 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 933 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 65.1% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 34.7% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| DTBench | 68.0% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMCA | 14.5% | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text | 1288 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1236 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1201 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1303 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1269 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1315 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1255 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1244 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1236 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1267 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1278 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1252 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1268 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1250 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1238 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1216 | Not measured | Only gpt-oss-20b measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Saba | 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
gpt-oss-20b costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
gpt-oss-20b costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
gpt-oss-20b 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.
| Specification | OpenAI gpt-oss-20b | Mistral Saba |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Mistral AI |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | August 5, 2025 | February 17, 2025 |
| Context window | 131K | 33K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.03 | $0.20 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.15 | $0.60 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is gpt-oss-20b better than Saba for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick gpt-oss-20b for output tokens 4.0x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.60 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 33K tokens).
Which is cheaper, gpt-oss-20b or Saba?
gpt-oss-20b costs $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Saba costs $0.20 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, gpt-oss-20b or Saba?
gpt-oss-20b, with 131K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks is the gpt-oss-20b vs Saba comparison based on?
4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. gpt-oss-20b's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Saba's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.