GPT 5.6 Sol
A version of the GPT series of models introduced by OpenAI, intended for planning and reasoning tasks.
Core Facts
Timeline (last 90 days)
According to the creator's real-world tests and community feedback, DeepSeek-V4.1-flash has surpassed Claude Opus 5, GPT 5.6 Sol, and a range of domestic open-source models on core metrics measuring real-world programming capability.
The blogger pointed out four discount factors in the benchmark comparison: different test frameworks (TerminalBench 1017 ran within the ClaudeCode framework while the baseline ran within the DeepSeek framework), Artificial Analysis's own test of the old Flash on TerminalBench scored only 26.8% rather than 31.2%, the competitor comparison used Opus 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol rather than the latest models, and the old model's NL2 repo score is inconsistent across different tables (64.0 vs 65.4).
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017's score on Terminal Bench 4.0 rose from 31.2% to 42.3%, surpassing GPT 5.6 Sol's 39.9%.
In the author's test of 10 prompts, Model Router delivered a 37.7% cost saving compared to using GPT 5.6 Sol directly.
In the author's tests, average latency was slightly higher with Model Router than with GPT 5.6 Sol used directly, and quality win rate declined.
On the DeepSuite benchmark, Grok 4.7 scored 71%, GPT 5.6 Sol scored 72.7%, Fable 5.1 scored 70%, and Astra Max topped the leaderboard at 74.1%.
Names such as 'GPT 5.6 Sol' and 'Luna' mentioned in the article are not officially publicly released products and may be the author's imagined future model names or internal code names.
In a music player hands-on test, GPT 5.6 Sol cost approximately 44 yuan and took 43 minutes, while GLM-5.3 Flash cost 0.37 yuan and took less time.
The content creator recommends a primary-plus-secondary model combination strategy: retaining flagship models such as GPT for critical delivery tasks, and using high cost-performance models such as GLM-5.3 Flash for batch, repetitive, trial-and-error tasks.
A developer gave an AI agent (referred to as 'GPT 5.6 Sol') real-world system permissions and financial tools with the directive 'Make as much money as possible'
All Facts (8)
On the DeepSuite benchmark, Grok 4.7 scored 71%, GPT 5.6 Sol scored 72.7%, Fable 5.1 scored 70%, and Astra Max topped the leaderboard at 74.1%.
65%UnverifiedAccording to the creator's real-world tests and community feedback, DeepSeek-V4.1-flash has surpassed Claude Opus 5, GPT 5.6 Sol, and a range of domestic open-source models on core metrics measuring real-world programming capability.
50%UnverifiedThe blogger pointed out four discount factors in the benchmark comparison: different test frameworks (TerminalBench 1017 ran within the ClaudeCode framework while the baseline ran within the DeepSeek framework), Artificial Analysis's own test of the old Flash on TerminalBench scored only 26.8% rather than 31.2%, the competitor comparison used Opus 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol rather than the latest models, and the old model's NL2 repo score is inconsistent across different tables (64.0 vs 65.4).
50%UnverifiedDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017's score on Terminal Bench 4.0 rose from 31.2% to 42.3%, surpassing GPT 5.6 Sol's 39.9%.
50%UnverifiedNames such as 'GPT 5.6 Sol' and 'Luna' mentioned in the article are not officially publicly released products and may be the author's imagined future model names or internal code names.
50%UnverifiedThe content creator recommends a primary-plus-secondary model combination strategy: retaining flagship models such as GPT for critical delivery tasks, and using high cost-performance models such as GLM-5.3 Flash for batch, repetitive, trial-and-error tasks.
50%UnverifiedIn a music player hands-on test, GPT 5.6 Sol cost approximately 44 yuan and took 43 minutes, while GLM-5.3 Flash cost 0.37 yuan and took less time.
50%UnverifiedA developer gave an AI agent (referred to as 'GPT 5.6 Sol') real-world system permissions and financial tools with the directive 'Make as much money as possible'
85%