GPT-5 vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
GPT-5 and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 are closely matched at 33.8 and 35.3 on the LLM Stats Score. LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is 6.5x cheaper per token.
OpenAI · Meituan · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
GPT-5 and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 33.8 and 35.3.
In the 8 individual benchmarks reported for both models, LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 wins 6; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is roughly 6.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
GPT-5 also accepts a larger context window (400,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose GPT-5
- you process long inputs — it offers a 400,000 token context window
Choose LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 8 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 6.5x cheaper per token
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jan 2026
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
34 reported for GPT-5 · 11 for LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
GPT-5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified), while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is better at 6 benchmarks (AIME 2025, BrowseComp, Humanity's Last Exam, Tau2 Airline, Tau2 Retail, Tau2 Telecom).
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, GPT-5 ($1.25/1M tokens) is 4.2x more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, GPT-5 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 8.3x more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, GPT-5 is more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
GPT-5 accepts 400,000 input tokens compared to LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601's 128,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 128,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
GPT-5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 does not.
GPT-5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
GPT-5
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
License
Usage and distribution terms
GPT-5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 uses MIT.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
MIT
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
GPT-5 was released on 2025-08-07, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 was released on 2026-01-14.
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is 5 months newer than GPT-5.
Aug 7, 2025
1.1 years ago
Jan 14, 2026
8 months ago
5mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
GPT-5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-09-30, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm GPT-5's training data extends to 2024-09-30, but cannot make a direct comparison without LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601's cutoff date.
Sep 2024
—
Provider Availability
GPT-5 is available from OpenAI. LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is available from Meituan.
GPT-5
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against GPT-5 and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about GPT-5 vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601.