GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-Rosalind-6

Where it leads

• Lower input and output prices, $10 and $50 vs $15 and $75 per 1M tokens
• Accepts image input
• Cheaper cached input, $1 vs $1.50 per 1M tokens

Best for

• Frontier reasoning and agentic evaluations where deep-context retrieval accuracy is the binding constraint
• Workloads that can be kept under the long-context threshold, where the effective rate stays at $10 / $50

Watch out for

• Long-context billing is a cliff, not a taper: a request over the long-context threshold is rebilled in full at $20 per million input and $75 per million output, so a prompt that crosses it costs roughly double
• GPT-6 Astra is the first publicly released model OpenAI classifies as crossing the Critical cybersecurity threshold under its own Preparedness Framework, which carries additional deployment safeguards
• Vendor-reported benchmark figures come from OpenAI’s own launch material and its own harness; they are not independently reproduced here

Where it leads

No measured lead over GPT-6 Astra in this data.

Best for

• Drug discovery and life sciences research teams approved for OpenAI's trusted access
• Dual-use biology research that GPT-6 Astra is more likely to refuse

Watch out for

• Limited access: OpenAI offers it only through its trusted-access program, after reviewing each applicant's intended use, security controls and governance, for internal research
• OpenAI treats it as High capability in the biological and chemical domain, so access comes with security, monitoring and enforcement terms
• OpenAI publishes no context window for it and compares it only with GPT-Rosalind-5.5; no independent benchmark score is recorded here yet