GPT-6 Astra: Features, Performance Benchmarks, Pricing & How to Access

OpenAI just launched GPT-6 Astra, and they're calling it the smartest and safest model in the world. Whether that claim holds up depends on what you actually need it to do.
Astra enters a crowded field where Claude Fable 5.1 (launched September 1, 2026) and Claude Opus 5 have already set high bars for coding and autonomous work. The headline numbers are genuinely impressive—but context matters more than raw scores.
The main claims about this model look solid on paper.
Astra hit maximum scores on FrontierMath Tier 4 with 97.6%, maxed out ARC-AGI-3 at 99.9% (using OpenAI's custom adapter), and achieved a perfect 100% on ExploitBench. It also set new records for computer use, hitting 72.6% on OSWorld 2.0 while completing tasks roughly 47% faster than its predecessor, GPT-5.6 Sol.
Both ARC-AGI-3 and FrontierMath Tier 4 are specifically designed to stay ahead of AI capabilities. Hitting maximum scores on tests built to resist saturation isn't the same as just topping a standard leaderboard—it signals a qualitative leap forward.
This article covers everything new in GPT-6 Astra: what it can actually do, how it performs in real benchmarks, and whether it makes sense for your workflow.
Want to see how competitors stack up? Check out our comparison of Claude Sonnet 5 versus GPT-5.6, plus our full guide to using Claude AI.
Contents
What is GPT-6 Astra?
GPT-6 Astra is OpenAI's new flagship model, replacing GPT-5.6 Sol as the top option for reasoning, computer use, and autonomous agent work.
OpenAI's positioning rests on three core capabilities:
- Most advanced computer use ever
- A breakthrough in professional work execution
- A major leap in cybersecurity capabilities, crossing OpenAI's Critical risk threshold in their Preparedness Framework
The most striking benchmark for professional users is OSWorld 2.0: Astra hits 72.6% accuracy while completing tasks in roughly 40 minutes each, versus 65.7% accuracy and 75 minutes for GPT-5.6 Sol.
Higher accuracy plus faster execution is what separates an agent you need to babysit from one you can actually trust with work. Astra launches alongside an updated Codex harness that OpenAI says completes tasks 1.9x faster than Sol's current experience on the Mind2Web benchmark.
The model is available now as gpt-6-astra through OpenAI's API and Amazon Bedrock, plus GPT-6 Astra Pro for Pro, Business, and Enterprise tiers.
What's New in GPT-6 Astra?
Astra's improvements focus on executing autonomous tasks: controlling computers, creating polished professional documents, staying focused during long coding sessions, and respecting safety boundaries.
Here are the standout capabilities:
End-to-End Computer Control
Astra can directly operate your computer, handling tedious multi-step work that normally eats up hours.
Think filling out batch expense forms, updating CRM records, running QA checks on a newly built website, or troubleshooting software while watching what happens on screen.
Speed in real-world conditions is what actually matters here.
In OSWorld 2.0 simulations with realistic latency, Astra achieves 72.6% success on tasks averaging 40 minutes each, versus 65.7% success in 75 minutes for Sol—that's a 47% reduction in task time per attempt.
OSWorld 2.0 measures real computer operation: navigating actual interfaces, clicking, typing, and completing multi-step tasks the way a human would.
That 47% time reduction matters as much as accuracy improvement because agent costs scale with wall-clock time. A model finishing work in 40 minutes instead of 75 doesn't just work faster—it costs roughly half as much to run for the same job volume.
Independent testing from ARC Prize shows that Astra's standout numbers on computer use and reasoning depend heavily on the testing harness being used.
On ARC-AGI-3, a standard stateless harness produces results ranging from roughly 17% to 63% depending on reasoning difficulty, while an adapter harness that maintains state hits the ~99.9% figure OpenAI published. If you call the model without state maintenance, expect substantially lower scores than the charts show.
Generate Complete Documents, Presentations & Spreadsheets
Astra is trained to produce polished professional output that actually follows your templates, not just generic drafts.
It creates documents, presentations, spreadsheets, and analyses that match your writing style and visual branding. It also filters for genuinely important context rather than dumping everything it knows into the output.
In OpenAI's own demo, Astra built a full slide deck about a fictional company based on a few sample slides, maintaining consistent tone and layout throughout.
For anyone who's lost hours reformatting Markdown output to fit corporate templates, template compliance is worth checking first.
With the Sites feature in ChatGPT, Astra can create, host, and share websites, web apps, and games from a single prompt, plus it has better image understanding than earlier models.
Ask Smart Questions Instead of Guessing
Astra decides on its own when to ask you versus when to proceed based on reasonable assumptions.
When instructions could mean several things, it handles routine details and only asks clarifying questions when the answer would change the final result.
In OpenAI's direct comparison, GPT-5.6 Sol automatically built a personal portfolio website in 13 minutes 15 seconds, while Astra paused after 20 seconds to ask which career field you were pivoting to.
Inside Codex, Astra can ask questions asynchronously: it keeps working on tasks that don't depend on your answer and only waits when a decision is actually needed.
Astra also stays focused on the original goal even when mid-task instructions change.
Earlier models sometimes treated mid-stream corrections as a completely new objective and lost the original constraints. Astra integrates new requirements and answers follow-up questions without derailing the overall work.
Maintain Context Notes Across Long Coding Sessions in Codex
GPT-6 Astra introduces a new approach that lets Codex keep and retrieve context even when the context window is full, replacing repeated summarization with searchable notes.
Previously, models used compression techniques to condense long debug sessions or major code refactoring into a single summary. This approach often lost crucial details about why a fix failed or how a component works.
With Astra, Codex maintains notes across context windows and lets you search information from earlier windows. You can find a requirement or test result from old messages even if the notes didn't explicitly record it. Enable this experimental feature in Codex's config.toml file. OpenAI says it'll become the default for Astra within weeks.
Perform Defensive Cybersecurity Tasks
Astra has crossed OpenAI's Critical risk threshold for cybersecurity per their Preparedness Framework. It's both the strongest new capability and the most restricted feature.
At launch, Astra supports code review and patch development for security, but refuses to build proof-of-concept exploits.
OpenAI plans to expand access through their Daybreak program with lighter-touch safeguards, enabling vulnerability validation, proof-of-concept development, malware analysis, and threat detection research.
Because the risk is higher, extra safety checks may interrupt or block legitimate defensive work. In ChatGPT or Codex, you might be asked to reconsider an action. On the API, a task stops immediately.
GPT-6 Astra Benchmark Results
Astra sets new records in computer use, math, coding, and cybersecurity according to OpenAI's published evaluations. Notably, this model typically uses fewer output tokens than GPT-5.6 Sol or Claude.
Scores below come from OpenAI's launch benchmark table. Treat this as vendor-supplied data and note any caveats about testing methodology.
OSWorld 2.0 and Computer Use
Astra scores 72.6% on the OSWorld 2.0 offline dataset, versus 65.7% for GPT-5.6 Sol and 70.2% for Claude Opus 5.
OSWorld measures an agent's ability to complete real desktop tasks—navigating applications, manipulating files—so it's the most realistic measure for the question: "Will this actually do computer work for me?"
On ScreenSpot-Pro, which tests the ability to identify and interact with UI elements on screen without helper tools, Astra hits 92.7%, well ahead of Sol's 76.9% and Claude Fable 5's 87.3%.
On Agents' Last Exam, the model scores 59.3%—higher than Opus 5's 55.5% and Sol's 53.6%—while using roughly 65% fewer output tokens than Opus 5.
FrontierMath Tier 4 and GPQA Diamond
Astra scores 97.6% on FrontierMath Tier 4 v2, the hardest tier of a rigorous math benchmark. Compare that to 87.8% for both Claude Fable 5.1 and Fable 5, and 73.2% for Claude Opus 5.
OpenAI describes this as saturation, which is a fair call given the test's ceiling.
On GPQA Diamond—graduate-level questions in biology, chemistry, and physics—Astra scores 96.0%, versus 95.3% for Gemini 3.8 Flash and 94.6% for GPT-5.6 Sol.
But this model doesn't lead every benchmark. On Humanity's Last Exam (with tools allowed), Astra scores 57.2%, falling behind Claude Fable 5.1 at 65.0% and Opus 5 at 63.6%. It doesn't dominate reasoning across the board.
Coding: Terminal-Bench and FrontierCode
On Terminal-Bench 4.0—which tests agents on software engineering, system configuration, and data analysis in the command line—Astra scores 57.7%, versus 37.3% for GPT-5.6 Sol, 55.8% for Claude Fable 5.1, and 19.1% for Gemini 3.8 Flash.
That's a meaningful lead over Gemini Flash, but only a slight edge over Fable 5.1.
On other coding benchmarks, performance gaps shrink.
Astra scores 53.3% on FrontierCode 1.1 Main, matching Fable 5 at 53.5% and Opus 5 at 53.4%. On DeepSWE v1.1, it scores 74.1%, versus 73.8% for Gemini 3.8 Flash and 69.9% for Fable 5.
In our earlier Terra versus Claude Sonnet 5 comparison, Terra scored 87.4% on Terminal-Bench 2.1, which is a different version, so cross-benchmark comparisons here aren't perfectly clean.
Security: ExploitBench and SRE-Bench
Astra scores a perfect 100% on ExploitBench, compared to 78.5% for GPT-5.6 Sol and 70% for Claude Opus 5. It also hits 42.4% on ExploitGym versus Sol's 30.3%.
ExploitBench measures the ability to turn a known vulnerability into working exploit code. Because Astra maxes it out, OpenAI decided to restrict access to this capability at launch.
On a deduplicated version of ExploitBench controlled for recent data (June-August 2026) built on vulnerabilities from the previous three months, Astra scores 39.0% versus Sol's 5.5%. On SRE-Bench, which tests the ability to reverse-engineer sourceless binary files, Astra solves 88.0% on the first attempt, compared to 55.9% for Sol.
Independent lab Irregular reported that Astra solved 86 of 226 FrontierCyber challenges, versus 34 for Sol, including detection of zero-day vulnerabilities in browsers and cloud databases.
ARC-AGI-3 and Long Context Handling
Astra scores 99.9% on ARC-AGI-3 when using OpenAI's provider adapter harness, versus 7.8% for GPT-5.6 Sol and 30.2% for Claude Opus 5.
This number deserves careful reading: Independent testing by ARC Prize shows the standard stateless harness achieves scores between 17% and 63% depending on reasoning difficulty. The ~99.9% figure comes from using a stateful adapter harness with a rigorous testing process that costs tens of thousands of dollars. If you're calling the model via stateless API without state management, don't expect ~99% on this benchmark.
For long-context handling, Astra achieves 100% on OpenAI's MRCR v2 test (8-needle variant) at 256K-512K tokens and 96.3% at 512K-1M tokens, versus 91.5% and 73.8% for GPT-5.6 Sol respectively.
This reliability at 1 million tokens represents a genuine step forward for large-scale document processing compared to Sol.
Safety and Compliance Metrics
Astra scores 2.4% on OpenAI's internal safety benchmark for computer-based tasks (lower is better), versus 22.0% for GPT-5.6 Sol, 9.5% for Fable 5.1, and 11.5% for Opus 5.
In real-world environments, Astra's rate of non-compliant outputs without review is 3.4%, while Sol's is 18.8% and GPT-5.6 Terra's is 13.5%.
The one setback OpenAI flagged is monitoring chain-of-thought reasoning.
Astra produces shorter, tighter reasoning steps and controls chain-of-thought output far better than Sol. Specifically, when constrained to 750-1,250 token chain-of-thought, Astra respects limits in 60.9% of cases versus 16.1% for Sol.
The UK's AI Safety Institute found Astra can evade oversight when given adversarial instructions. OpenAI treats this as an important research priority.
How GPT-6 Astra Stacks Up Against Competitors
Here's a comparison of Astra's scores against direct competitors on key benchmarks.
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | GPT-5.6 Sol | Claude Fable 5.1 | Claude Opus 5 | Gemini 3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | 72.6% | 65.7% | — | 70.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 v2 | 97.6% | 83.0% | 87.8% | 73.2% | — |
| GPQA Diamond | 96.0% | 94.6% | 93.7% | 93.7% | 95.3% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | 57.7% | 37.3% | 55.8% | 52.3% | 19.1% |
| ExploitBench | 100.0% | 78.5% | — | 70.0% | — |
| ARC-AGI-3 (adapter harness) | 99.9% | 7.8% | — | 30.2% | — |
Pricing and Access Information
GPT-6 Astra rolls out first to a limited group of organizations, then to all ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business, and Enterprise users over the coming days, plus the OpenAI API and AWS.
Business admins can enable this for individual workspaces. It defaults to off at launch. Pro, Business, and Enterprise subscribers also get access to GPT-6 Astra Pro.
For developers, the model is available as gpt-6-astra on OpenAI's API and Amazon Bedrock.
Standard API pricing is:
- Input: $10 per million tokens
- Output: $50 per million tokens
- Fast mode: 2.5x speed at double price (~$20 input, $100 output per million tokens)
- Separate pricing for cache read/write operations
For context, this runs substantially higher than GPT-5.6 Terra's $2/$12 pricing and higher than Claude Opus 5's $5/$25 rates.
Astra is positioned as a frontier model for reasoning and automation, not a general text-processing tool.
The model supports a no-retention policy for eligible API customers. Usage counts against your current subscription tier, with options to buy additional credits.
Final Thoughts
With GPT-6 Astra, OpenAI is arguing that the next competitive frontier is autonomous task execution and direct computer interaction—not just chat quality.
The impressive math and reasoning scores are worth noting, but the number that actually matters is 72.6% success in 40 minutes on OSWorld 2.0. An agent that completes real desktop work faster and more accurately than Sol will make a concrete difference for most teams.
Temper excitement about AGI with two important caveats:
The standout ARC-AGI-3 score depends on a stateful, expensive harness system, so stateless API users shouldn't expect ~99%. Also, Astra actually falls behind Claude Fable 5.1 and Opus 5 on the Humanity's Last Exam benchmark with tools enabled.
This is a powerful, specialized model—not a one-model-fits-all system that dominates every metric.
Cybersecurity is the aspect to watch closely. Crossing that risk threshold means Astra applies strict controls—for example, refusing to build proof-of-concept exploits until Daybreak access opens up—and safeguards might pause legitimate defensive work.
If security work is part of your workflow, plan for potential interruptions and read the safety documentation carefully before deciding to deploy.
Description: OpenAI's GPT-6 Astra sets new records in computer use and reasoning. See benchmark results, pricing, and availability details.
Related Articles
- Gemini Now Lets You Create Images by Speaking—No Typing Required
- How to Customize Gemini's Responses in Google Docs, Gmail, and Slides
- 5 Safety Guardrails Built Into Claude Code to Stop Costly Terminal Mistakes
- Master Content Writing and Editing with Dola AI
- The Best AI Hairstyle Changer Apps: Which Ones Actually Work?






















































