GPT-6.1 Terra vs Step-3.5-Flash
GPT-6.1 Terra leads the LLM Stats Score 47.5 to 36.5. Step-3.5-Flash is 11.4x cheaper per token.
OpenAI · StepFun · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
GPT-6.1 Terra leads the overall LLM Stats Score 47.5 to 36.5, ranking #36 overall.
On price, Step-3.5-Flash is roughly 11.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
GPT-6.1 Terra also accepts a larger context window (1,050,000 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-6.1 Terra
- overall performance matters — it scores 47.5 and ranks #36 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,050,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
Choose Step-3.5-Flash
- cost matters — it's about 11.4x cheaper per token
- 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
8 reported for GPT-6.1 Terra · 7 for Step-3.5-Flash
GPT-6.1 Terra and Step-3.5-Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, GPT-6.1 Terra ($1.00/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than Step-3.5-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, GPT-6.1 Terra ($5.00/1M tokens) is 12.5x more expensive than Step-3.5-Flash ($0.40/1M tokens).
In conclusion, GPT-6.1 Terra is more expensive than Step-3.5-Flash.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
GPT-6.1 Terra accepts 1,050,000 input tokens compared to Step-3.5-Flash's 65,536 tokens. GPT-6.1 Terra can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Step-3.5-Flash is limited to 8,192 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
GPT-6.1 Terra supports multimodal inputs, whereas Step-3.5-Flash does not.
GPT-6.1 Terra can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
GPT-6.1 Terra
Step-3.5-Flash
License
Usage and distribution terms
GPT-6.1 Terra is licensed under a proprietary license, while Step-3.5-Flash uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
GPT-6.1 Terra was released on 2026-10-26, while Step-3.5-Flash was released on 2026-02-02.
GPT-6.1 Terra is 9 months newer than Step-3.5-Flash.
Oct 26, 2026
-1 days ago
8mo newerFeb 2, 2026
8 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
GPT-6.1 Terra has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Step-3.5-Flash's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm GPT-6.1 Terra's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Step-3.5-Flash's cutoff date.
Jun 2026
—
Provider Availability
GPT-6.1 Terra is available from OpenAI. Step-3.5-Flash is available from StepFun.
GPT-6.1 Terra
Step-3.5-Flash
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against GPT-6.1 Terra and Step-3.5-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about GPT-6.1 Terra vs Step-3.5-Flash.