The Right-Sized LLM Benchmark Cheapest LLM that's good enough.

GPT-5.6 Sol at a glance

Good enough on 29/52 tasks at the 90% bar. Best value on 0 tasks. Best fit for: Structured Data & Fact Extraction, Financial Analysis & Trading Decisions, Infrastructure & Utility, Long-form Content G

Provider
OpenAI
Model name
gpt-5.6-sol
Cost mode:
Qualifies on
29 / 52 tasks (at 90% bar)
Best value on
0 tasks

Cost vs quality across all tasks

0%25%50%75%100%678910Quality score (6–10)Cost-efficiency vs best value (1.0 = best value)Public Response Generation — quality 8.53, 14.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReference Preserving Analytical Writing — quality 8.63, 13.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionShort Promotional Teaser Generation — quality 8.22, 12.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Structure Extraction — quality 9.06, 3.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionContent Set Relevance Scoring — quality 6.91, 9.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionMulti Perspective Decision Synthesis — quality 8.12, 17.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Section Assignment — quality 8.26, 87.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionVisual Theme Configuration Generation — quality 9.08, 18.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionCommunity Policy Evaluation — quality 9.24, 12.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEngagement Opportunity Triage — quality 8.43, 20.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionLanguage Identification — quality 10.00, 18.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSocial Post Portfolio Selection — quality 8.48, 17.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionVoice Profile Generation — quality 9.12, 15.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Analysis — quality 8.37, 1.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionAuthoritative Source Selection — quality 8.76, 22.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBatch Text Translation — quality 8.93, 21.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Taxonomy Matching — quality 8.35, 18.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionContent To Image Prompt Generation — quality 8.99, 16.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Section Analysis — quality 8.89, 28.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionGenerated Content Relevance Scoring — quality 9.16, 12.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Message Generation — quality 8.52, 9.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionStructured Content Summarization — quality 8.84, 13.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionThematic Topic Discovery — quality 8.49, 18.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionStructured Output Extraction — quality 9.74, 23.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSection Prompt Generation — quality 8.56, 20.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Cluster Labeling — quality 8.34, 7.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionModel Specific Prompt Adaptation — quality 8.58, 10.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Query Generation — quality 8.15, 17.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPersona Policy Eligibility Check — quality 9.04, 17.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough option

within ~1.3× of the best-value model · 1.3–2× · >2× · ★ this model is the best-value pick on that task. Top-right = best quadrant. Only tasks where this model qualifies at the 90% bar are plotted.

Per-task breakdown

TaskCategoryQuality (% of best)ConfidenceOverpay
Profiled Document AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions96%MEDIUM1.4x
Profiled Document Structure ExtractionStructured Data & Fact Extraction95%MEDIUM3x
Topic Cluster LabelingTopic Organization & Clustering94%MEDIUM7.2x
Content Set Relevance ScoringRelevance, Classification & Matching98%MEDIUM9.5x
Promotional Message GenerationSocial & Promotional Content98%RANKED9.7x
Model Specific Prompt AdaptationInfrastructure & Utility97%RANKED10x
Generated Content Relevance ScoringRelevance, Classification & Matching100%HIGH12x
Short Promotional Teaser GenerationSocial & Promotional Content94%RANKED12x
Community Policy EvaluationRelevance, Classification & Matching100%MEDIUM12x
Structured Content SummarizationContent Summarization & Synthesis96%HIGH13x
Reference Preserving Analytical WritingLong-form Content Generation94%MEDIUM14x
Public Response GenerationSocial & Promotional Content100%RANKED14x
Voice Profile GenerationLong-form Content Generation93%RANKED15x
Content To Image Prompt Generation bestInfrastructure & Utility100%RANKED16x
Persona Policy Eligibility CheckRelevance, Classification & Matching98%RANKED17x
Multi Perspective Decision SynthesisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions92%HIGH18x
Social Post Portfolio SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching97%RANKED18x
Research Query GenerationInfrastructure & Utility100%HIGH18x
Thematic Topic Discovery bestTopic Organization & Clustering100%HIGH18x
Topic Taxonomy MatchingRelevance, Classification & Matching99%HIGH19x
Language IdentificationRelevance, Classification & Matching99%RANKED19x
Visual Theme Configuration GenerationLong-form Content Generation97%HIGH19x
Engagement Opportunity TriageRelevance, Classification & Matching95%HIGH20x
Section Prompt Generation bestInfrastructure & Utility100%MEDIUM20x
Batch Text TranslationInfrastructure & Utility95%RANKED22x
Authoritative Source Selection bestRelevance, Classification & Matching100%RANKED22x
Structured Output ExtractionStructured Data & Fact Extraction100%RANKED24x
Profiled Document Section AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions97%RANKED29x
Topic Section AssignmentTopic Organization & Clustering95%MEDIUM87x

Overpay — how much more you pay by running this model instead of the best-value model that clears the quality bar on that task (marked ★). "16x" means you overpay 16× — the same output for 16× the best-value good-enough option; ★ means this model is that option (no overpayment). Confidence — how sure we are about the quality score (more judgments + more agreement = higher confidence): RANKED many independent judges scored this model's outputs and their agreement is very high (most confident) — HIGH many judges have scored it and they mostly agree (well-pinned) — MEDIUM enough judges have weighed in to publish, but they disagree more than we'd like (treat with a small grain of salt). LOW-confidence cells are hidden everywhere on the site. See the methodology for the exact thresholds.