The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GPT OSS 20B vs o1-mini

GPT OSS 20B and o1-mini are closely matched at 17.4 and 10.5 on the LLM Stats Score. GPT OSS 20B is 60.0x cheaper per token.

OpenAI · OpenAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GPT OSS 20B and o1-mini are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 17.4 and 10.5.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, GPT OSS 20B wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, GPT OSS 20B is roughly 60.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

GPT OSS 20B also accepts a larger context window (131,072 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 OSS 20B

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 60.0x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 131,072 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2025
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose o1-mini

  • you want predictable pricing at $3.00/M input and $12.00/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
17.4
#197
10.5
#245
15.9
#201
10.7
#239
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$0.05 / M
$3.00 / M
Output price
$0.20 / M
$12.00 / M
Context window
131,072
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
GPT OSS 20B
o1-mini
17.4#184
11.1#232
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for GPT OSS 20B · 6 for o1-mini

2 shared

GPT OSS 20B outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU), while o1-mini is better at 0 benchmarks.

GPT OSS 20B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sat Aug 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GPT OSS 20B costs less

For input processing, GPT OSS 20B ($0.05/1M tokens) is 60.0x cheaper than o1-mini ($3.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, GPT OSS 20B ($0.20/1M tokens) is 60.0x cheaper than o1-mini ($12.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, o1-mini is more expensive than GPT OSS 20B.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Aug 29 2026 • llm-stats.com
OpenAI
GPT OSS 20B
Input tokens$0.05
Output tokens$0.20
Best providerNovita
OpenAI
o1-mini
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$12.00
Best providerOpenAI
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GPT OSS 20B accepts 131,072 input tokens compared to o1-mini's 128,000 tokens. o1-mini can generate longer responses up to 65,536 tokens, while GPT OSS 20B is limited to 32,768 tokens.

OpenAI
GPT OSS 20B
Input131,072 tokens
Output32,768 tokens
OpenAI
o1-mini
Input128,000 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Sat Aug 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

GPT OSS 20B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while o1-mini uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

GPT OSS 20B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

o1-mini

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GPT OSS 20B was released on 2025-08-05, while o1-mini was released on 2024-09-12.

GPT OSS 20B is 11 months newer than o1-mini.

GPT OSS 20B

Aug 5, 2025

1.1 years ago

10mo newer
o1-mini

Sep 12, 2024

2.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

GPT OSS 20B is available from Novita, Fireworks, Groq, OpenAI. o1-mini is available from OpenAI, Azure.

GPT OSS 20B

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.05/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
groq logo
Groq
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

o1-mini

openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $12.00/1M
azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $3.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $13.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GPT OSS 20B and o1-mini side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GPT OSS 20B
✓ Preferred
o1-mini
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GPT OSS 20B vs o1-mini.

Which is better, GPT OSS 20B or o1-mini?

GPT OSS 20B and o1-mini are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 17.4 and 10.5. GPT OSS 20B is made by OpenAI and o1-mini is made by OpenAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does GPT OSS 20B compare to o1-mini in benchmarks?

GPT OSS 20B scores MMLU: 85.3%, CodeForces: 74.3%, GPQA: 71.5%, TAU-bench Retail: 54.8%, HealthBench: 42.5%. o1-mini scores HumanEval: 92.4%, MATH-500: 90.0%, MMLU: 85.2%, SuperGLUE: 75.0%, GPQA: 60.0%.

Is GPT OSS 20B cheaper than o1-mini?

GPT OSS 20B is 60.0x cheaper for input tokens. GPT OSS 20B costs $0.05/M input and $0.20/M output via novita. o1-mini costs $3.00/M input and $12.00/M output via openai.

What are the context window sizes for GPT OSS 20B and o1-mini?

GPT OSS 20B supports 131K tokens and o1-mini supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GPT OSS 20B and o1-mini?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (17.4 vs 10.5), context window (131K vs 128K), input pricing ($0.05 vs $3.00/M), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.