AI Coding Live News

OpenAI Launches Grid Protectors Program: Future Compute Campuses Will Cut Power When Grids Are Strained, Starting With Up to 1,000 MW in Georgia

On November 2, OpenAI announced the Grid Protectors Program on its official blog: working with utilities and regulators so its future self-built compute campuses (its new term for data centers) cut electricity use when the grid is strained, while paying the full infrastructure and electric-service costs. The pilot is the planned campus in Effingham County, Georgia (Project Camellia), which Georgia Power says needs about 3,200 MW and commits up to 1,000 MW of flexible demand response, equal per OpenAI to the average use of roughly 700,000 households. The campus is still in development.

OpenAI Launches Grid Protectors Program: Future Compute Campuses Will Cut Power When Grids Are Strained, Starting With Up to 1,000 MW in Georgia

Key Takeaways

  • The Effingham campus (Project Camellia) needs about 3,200 MW, and Georgia Power can cut up to 1,000 MW of supply to it during peaks under a 25-year agreement (Georgia Power figures).
  • OpenAI says 1,000 MW equals the average demand of roughly 700,000 households, more than Washington, D.C., and Boston combined.
  • Georgia Power projects about $950 million a year in customer savings from 2029 from its large-load portfolio including this project, at least $15 a month for a typical home.
  • OpenAI commits to paying the full grid infrastructure and electric-service costs; terms for other campuses will be shared once finalized.
  • OpenAI cites a projection that U.S. data center capacity will exceed 100 GW by 2030.
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:

X Discussion: Elon Musk Says Grok Bot Serving Costs Were Unsustainably High Relative to Revenue; Replit CEO Amjad Masad Warns Subsidized AI Subscriptions Face a Rug Pull

After users on X complained that their Grok Bot usage ran out early this cycle, Elon Musk replied that "the cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue", a reply with about 13K likes and 5.5M views. Replit CEO Amjad Masad then quoted the news, saying people enjoying subsidized AI subscriptions should "get ready to get rug pulled", sparking a debate over whether flat-rate AI plans can last. This is an X discussion with personal views; xAI has not published a formal pricing or limit announcement.

Key Takeaways

  • Trigger: user @DogecoinNorway said their Grok Bot usage hit 100% with 4 days left until reset, a post with about 1.24M views.
  • Musk replied that the cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue, with about 13.2K likes, 5.51M views and 1,900+ quotes.
  • Amjad Masad (Replit CEO) quoted it, warning subsidized AI subscriptions are about to get rug pulled, with about 2,347 likes and 146K views; in replies he said Replit never subsidized.
  • xAI has not published a formal limit or pricing change; rely on official notices for specifics.
Read full story

X discussion: Scott Alexander's "Against SURA" criticizes the "stop unilaterally and raise awareness" line, as AI safety is accused of acting like a mass political movement

On October 31, Scott Alexander published "Against SURA" on LessWrong. He uses SURA (Stop Unilaterally + Raise Awareness) for the view that AI companies, their employees and countries should halt AI work on their own and focus on raising awareness, and argues it would hand the lead to companies that do not prioritize alignment and cost the US its bargaining chip with China. He cites AI Futures Project members' survival estimates for scenarios without a global pause, mostly in the 25%-50% range, to push back on 90%+ doom estimates. Blogger jessicat quoted it and said parts of AI safety now behave like a mass political movement with bad epistemics (about 359 likes, 63K views); Bloomberg Odd Lots co-host Joe Weisenthal summed it up as people competing to out-doom each other (about 287 likes, 38K views). This is an opinion debate, not a policy announcement from any organization.

X discussion: Scott Alexander's "Against SURA" criticizes the "stop unilaterally and raise awareness" line, as AI safety is accused of acting like a mass political movement

Key Takeaways

  • Source: Scott Alexander's "Against SURA" on LessWrong, posted 2026-10-31 19:32 UTC; SURA stands for Stop Unilaterally + Raise Awareness
  • AI Futures Project members' survival estimates for three no-global-pause scenarios (C+ / C / D), as cited: Daniel Kokotajlo 40%/20%/10%, Ryan Greenblatt 60%/63%/55%, Eli Lifland 50%/45%/32%, Thomas Larsen 45%/35%/20%, Romeo Dean 40%/35%/20%; the AI forecaster FutureSearch gave 44%
  • He says that if the US unilaterally passed Sanders' "Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act" (endorsed by MIRI), the AI forecaster he asked put the chance of China agreeing to a pause within a year at only 7%, up from 1%
  • jessicat's quote post (Oct 31, 23:01 UTC) has about 359 likes, 28 reposts and 63K views; Joe Weisenthal's quote (Nov 1, 14:57 UTC) has about 287 likes, 33 replies and 38K views
  • Note: the "10-40%" in Weisenthal's post is his paraphrase; the estimates in the essay's table range from 10% to 63%
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:
T
Tsinghua University & Z.AI (HarnessPro, arXiv 2610.26770)arxiv.org·
👀11
🔥80

Tsinghua and Z.AI open-source HarnessPro: agents rewrite their own harness, reaching 80.8% on Terminal-Bench 2 at 34% lower cost per task

HarnessPro (arXiv 2610.26770, submitted Oct 19 and revised Oct 20), from Tsinghua University, Z.AI (Zhipu) and collaborators, is a label-free way to improve an agent harness: specialized agents diagnose execution traces, rewrite instructions and runtime policies, score candidates with LLM-generated tests, and keep Lite, Medium and Heavy harnesses along the performance-cost frontier. Per the paper, with GPT-5.5 and Codex the Heavy mode reaches 80.8% on Terminal-Bench 2, 4.5 points above the prior RHO method, while cost per task drops from $1.09 to $0.72. The code is MIT-licensed and drew wider media coverage this week, including from Pandaily.

Tsinghua and Z.AI open-source HarnessPro: agents rewrite their own harness, reaching 80.8% on Terminal-Bench 2 at 34% lower cost per task

Key Takeaways

  • Terminal-Bench 2 (GPT-5.5 with Codex, mean of 3 runs): Heavy reaches 80.8% at $0.72 per task, versus RHO at 76.3% and $1.09, a 33.9% cost cut (paper figures, arXiv)
  • Averaged over three benchmarks: +2.0 points pass rate and -26.1% cost per task versus RHO, across Terminal-Bench 2, SWE-Bench Pro and ProgramBench
  • Holds across models: with GLM-5.2 and Claude Code on Terminal-Bench 2, Heavy hits 81.4% at $0.62, versus vanilla at 74.6% and $0.92 and RHO at 78.0% and $1.00
  • Budget modes: Medium matches RHO at 76.3% on Terminal-Bench 2 for only $0.56 per task; Lite gets 72.9% at $0.43
  • Cheap to train: only 10 training tasks per benchmark and 3 to 4 evolution epochs, tested on 59, 100 and 100 held-out tasks; the three harness tiers are MIT-licensed on GitHub
Read full story
ADSponsored

Microsoft Research and UC Berkeley open-source TokenEconomizer, a plugin that cuts Claude Code and Codex costs by 18.4–30.9% on SWE-Bench without changing the agent

Microsoft Research, Microsoft Security and UC Berkeley open-sourced TokenEconomizer on GitHub (Apache 2.0, v0.1.0 released October 26), a plugin for Claude Code, Codex, GitHub Copilot CLI and Pi, with experimental opencode support. It learns from earlier sessions in the same repository: micro-skills remember repo facts, tool pruning drops tool definitions that go unused, and a loop guard nudges an agent that is stuck. The paper reports 18.4–30.9% lower mean cost across five agent and model combinations on 277 SWE-Bench tasks (paper figures).

Microsoft Research and UC Berkeley open-source TokenEconomizer, a plugin that cuts Claude Code and Codex costs by 18.4–30.9% on SWE-Bench without changing the agent

Key Takeaways

  • Cost: on 277 SWE-Bench tasks across 6 repositories and 5 agent and model combinations, mean cost fell 18.4–30.9%, and all 30 repository-by-combination cells got cheaper (paper figures, including the plugin's own model calls)
  • Success rate: Pass@1 rose in 4 of 5 combinations, e.g. Copilot CLI with Sonnet 5 cost 18.4% less with Pass@1 +2.6, while Claude Code with Opus 4.8 cost 30.9% less with Pass@1 -1.0
  • Three mechanisms: micro-skills (repo facts stated only after three sessions confirm them), tool pruning (by default a tool unused over 10 prompts across 2 sessions is left out), and a failure-loop guard (one redirect when a judge is at least 0.7 confident, never stopping a turn itself)
  • Generalization: 16–21% lower cost on Web-Bench and 6–20% lower on two security-auditing benchmarks where every task is a new repository
  • Deployment: Apache 2.0, Python 3.10+, no API key of its own, and learned experience stays local in ~/.tokeneconomizer
Read full story

Claude API launches the Usage and Cost Analytics API in beta and raises the request size limit to 128 MB

Per the official Claude API release notes, on Oct 29 Anthropic launched the Usage and Cost Analytics API in beta, with two endpoints, /v1/organizations/analytics/usage and /analytics/cost, that filter and group token usage and cost by model, workspace, API key, and the user or service account behind each request, with 1-minute, 1-hour, or 1-day buckets. The older Usage and Cost API is now legacy but still supported. On Oct 28 the maximum request size for the Messages and Token Counting APIs on the first-party Claude API rose from 32 MB to 128 MB.

Key Takeaways

  • The new API needs the analytics-usage-cost-2026-08-24 beta header; one endpoint returns token and request counts, the other cost in USD (per the official docs)
  • group_by takes up to 5 dimensions, time buckets can be 1m, 1h, or 1d, and each filter accepts up to 100 values
  • Claude Console and Claude Enterprise organizations share the same endpoints and fields; it also works on Claude Platform on AWS and Claude Models on Google Cloud (Anthropic managed)
  • The old Usage and Cost API and four Enterprise Analytics usage and cost report endpoints are now legacy but still supported, with migration guides
  • Since Oct 28 the Messages and Token Counting APIs accept requests up to 128 MB instead of 32 MB (4x), on the first-party Claude API only
Read full story

Epoch AI: open-weight GLM 5.3 autonomously exploited the patch gap in six Firefox releases for about $1,000 each

Epoch AI reported on Oct 29 that, in a deliberately basic setup emulating an unsophisticated attacker, Z.ai's open-weight GLM 5.3 read security fixes that were public but not yet shipped and autonomously built exploit chains for all six Firefox releases from Sep 17 to Oct 26, letting a single webpage visit read local files. Marginal cost was about $1,000 per version and the fastest run took 12 hours. Mozilla patched a previously undisclosed bug the model also used in Firefox 159.0 on Oct 27.

Epoch AI: open-weight GLM 5.3 autonomously exploited the patch gap in six Firefox releases for about $1,000 each

Key Takeaways

  • 6 of 6: every Firefox release from Sep 17 to Oct 26 was compromised using only information public at each release (Epoch report)
  • About $1,000 marginal cost per version, with a 48-hour budget and the fastest run at 12 hours; total Firefox research spend exceeded $100,000 including setup
  • The model also rediscovered an unpublished bug on each attempt, which Mozilla fixed in Firefox 159.0 on Oct 27
  • No refusals or safeguards triggered through first-party or third-party APIs
  • Roughly $100,000 of attempts against Chrome failed so far, which Epoch says is not strong evidence Chrome is safe
Read full story

Amp launches macOS Satellites beta: agents boot a cloud Mac with Xcode in ~30 seconds to build, test and run iOS and Mac apps, from $2/hour

On Oct 29 Amp shipped macOS Satellites: threads keep running on a Linux orb, and when work needs macOS Amp boots a fresh cloud Mac with Xcode and simulators, uses it only to build, run and test, and returns screenshots, logs and screen recordings to the thread. mac.medium costs $2/hour and mac.large $4/hour; the beta is waitlisted. CEO Quinn Slack says agents need a Mac only about 35% of the time even for macOS-heavy work.

Amp launches macOS Satellites beta: agents boot a cloud Mac with Xcode in ~30 seconds to build, test and run iOS and Mac apps, from $2/hour

Key Takeaways

  • Amp says the cloud Mac is ready in about 30 seconds with Xcode, iOS simulators and Homebrew preinstalled
  • Two sizes: mac.medium (6 CPUs, 14 GB) at $2/hour and mac.large (12 CPUs, 28 GB) at $4/hour, drawn first from plan orb usage, then Amp credits
  • A Mac stays up 20 minutes after use so follow-ups reuse its build cache, then it is deleted and nothing is saved
  • CEO Quinn Slack posted on X that even macOS-heavy agent work needs a Mac only ~35% of the time (company figure)
  • Beta only: join the waitlist under Settings > Experimental Features
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:

GitHub Agentic Workflows is generally available: write automation in Markdown, compile it to Actions YAML, run Copilot or your own coding agent, now with ARC self-hosting and micro-VM isolation

At Universe 2026 on Oct 28, GitHub made GitHub Agentic Workflows, an open source GitHub Next project, generally available on GitHub Free, Team and Enterprise. Developers describe tasks such as issue triage, CI failure analysis, documentation updates and test writing in natural-language Markdown, and gh aw compiles them into standard Actions YAML run by Copilot or a coding agent of their choice. GA adds self-hosted ARC runners with Docker-in-Docker, a non-experimental gh aw forecast cost estimate, per-workflow model providers and model routing, and Cloud Hypervisor or NVX micro-VM isolation.

GitHub Agentic Workflows is generally available: write automation in Markdown, compile it to Actions YAML, run Copilot or your own coding agent, now with ARC self-hosting and micro-VM isolation

Key Takeaways

  • Availability: GitHub Free, Team and Enterprise on github.com; using the default Copilot CLI engine requires a Copilot license
  • How it works: requirements in Markdown, compiled to standard Actions YAML that reuses existing runner groups and policies; run with Copilot or your own coding agent
  • Safe defaults: read-only permissions, a sandboxed container behind the Agent Workflow Firewall, safe-outputs validation, and a threat detection job before changes are applied
  • New at GA: self-hosted ARC runners with Docker-in-Docker, gh aw forecast out of experimental (with threat detection credits and monthly ranges), per-workflow model providers, model routing, micro-VM isolation and cross-repo enclaves
  • Customer story (Accenture's figures): one lead saved about 29 hours a week, AI authors 91% of the team's commits, and production errors fell from about 11,000 a day to under 1,000
Read full story

Suhail launches Particle and its first model, Particle-1: a DeepSeek V4.1 Flash post-train that uses about 45% fewer tokens on coding tasks

On Oct 28, Mixpanel founder Suhail Doshi announced his new company Particle on X, with its first model, Particle-1, live now. Particle's blog says it is a reinforcement-learning post-train of DeepSeek V4.1 Flash that uses 28.4% to 52.2% fewer output tokens and costs 34.4% to 51.6% less per task across four coding and data engineering benchmarks, with pass rates inside the base model's confidence intervals. It is available through the Particle API, OpenRouter and Vercel AI Gateway; Particle's docs list $0.25 input and $1.00 output per million tokens with a 1,048,576-token context window.

Suhail launches Particle and its first model, Particle-1: a DeepSeek V4.1 Flash post-train that uses about 45% fewer tokens on coding tasks

Key Takeaways

  • Across four benchmarks (Terminal-Bench 2.1, ReactBench, ADE Bench, DeepSWE 1.1), 28.4% to 52.2% fewer output tokens and 34.4% to 51.6% lower cost per task (vendor-reported)
  • Particle's summary table: $0.2211 per task versus $0.3368 for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and $0.6523 for GLM 5.3 Flash; 59,580 mean output tokens versus 83,246 and 98,155
  • Task pass rate 72.57% versus 71.15% for the base model and 66.82% for GLM 5.3 Flash; GPQA Diamond 90.40% (base 90.91%), MMLU 86.08% (base 85.98%)
  • Training: a rank-64 LoRA on the experts in all layers, about 1.25% of the model's parameters, trained with sequence-level GSPO in two RL stages
  • Pricing: Particle docs currently list $0.25 input, $0.03 cached input and $1.00 output per million tokens, a 1,048,576-token context and a 131,072-token output ceiling
Read full story
ADSponsored

Alphabet Q3 2026: revenue up 25% to $127.6B, Google Cloud up 103%, first-party model APIs near 32B tokens per minute

After the US market close on Oct 28, Alphabet reported Q3 2026 results: revenue rose 25% to $127.6B, and Google Cloud revenue more than doubled, up 103% to $30.7B, which the company attributes to enterprise AI infrastructure, AI solutions and TPU system sales. In the release and on X, Sundar Pichai said first-party model APIs now process nearly 32B tokens per minute, more than four times a year ago, and that the Gemini app has reached one billion users. The cost: Q3 capital expenditures of $51.4B and free cash flow of negative $9.1B.

Alphabet Q3 2026: revenue up 25% to $127.6B, Google Cloud up 103%, first-party model APIs near 32B tokens per minute

Key Takeaways

  • Revenue of $127.58B, up 25% year over year and the 13th straight quarter of double-digit growth; Pichai says Alphabet is on a $500B annual revenue run rate
  • Google Cloud revenue of $30.71B versus $15.16B a year ago, up 103%; Cloud operating income of $11.12B versus $3.59B
  • First-party model APIs process nearly 32B tokens per minute, more than 4x a year ago; Pichai's X post puts quarter-over-quarter growth at 40%
  • The Gemini app reached one billion users, which Google calls the fastest-growing product in its history; Search query growth is the highest in five years
  • Q3 capex of $51.36B versus $23.95B a year ago, and free cash flow of negative $9.07B, the second negative quarter in a row
Read full story

GitHub Universe 2026: Copilot Fusion is generally available, routing and orchestrating models automatically, with Fusion Max scoring 60 on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index at about half the cost of Claude Code with Opus 5.5 Max

At GitHub Universe 2026 on Oct 28, GitHub made Copilot Fusion generally available. It merges the multi-model orchestration of the Project HydraFusion research preview with Copilot auto model selection: users pick Copilot Fusion and an effort level (Standard, High or Max) in the model picker, and the system decides which models to use and whether to run a Single, Cascade or Critique workflow. GitHub says Fusion Max scored 60 on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, two points below Claude Code with Opus 5.5 Max, at about half the API cost per task, about half the tokens and about 40% less time. Each underlying model is billed at its standard rate, and paid plans get 30% off through Nov 30.

GitHub Universe 2026: Copilot Fusion is generally available, routing and orchestrating models automatically, with Fusion Max scoring 60 on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index at about half the cost of Claude Code with Opus 5.5 Max

Key Takeaways

  • Scores (Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index v2.0): Fusion Max 60 versus 62 for Claude Code with Opus 5.5 Max; $5.59 per task versus $11.42, while the Devin Fusion pairing scores 62 at $8.00
  • Breakdown: a slight lead on Terminal-Bench 4.0 at 71, third on FrontierCode at 51 (Claude Code 56, Devin Fusion 54), and a weaker 57 on SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA
  • Efficiency: about 7.2M tokens per task, roughly half of Claude Code with Opus 5.5 and 30% fewer than Devin Fusion; GitHub reports about 40% less time per task
  • The pool includes Claude Opus 5.5, Claude Sonnet 5.5, GPT-6 Astra and GPT-6 Sol; admins can disable individual models for Fusion only and set Fusion as the default
  • Availability: all Copilot plans in VS Code, the Copilot app, Copilot CLI and JetBrains IDEs; existing auto, HydraFusion and HydraFusion Max selections migrate to matching effort levels
Read full story

Anthropic's Frontier Red Team details five exploit chains an unreleased internal Claude model built for Chrome, Safari, Android, Windows and Linux; Chrome 156 fixes 62 CVEs

Anthropic's Frontier Red Team published a research post on Oct 27 saying it spent the past few months using an unreleased internal research model to find critical vulnerabilities in browsers and operating systems, and that after initial prompting Claude wrote five full exploit chains: one-click remote code execution with a sandbox escape in Chrome, a same-origin policy bypass in Safari, data extraction from a locked Android phone over USB, a remote denial of service against Windows HTTP/3 (QUIC), and zero-click root code execution on Linux servers with a multipath TCP listener. Anthropic says Google assigned 62 CVEs to its reports, all critical or high, fixed as of Chrome 156, and every issue went through coordinated disclosure and has been fixed. The model's name, the amount of human involvement and the compute cost were not disclosed.

Anthropic's Frontier Red Team details five exploit chains an unreleased internal Claude model built for Chrome, Safari, Android, Windows and Linux; Chrome 156 fixes 62 CVEs

Key Takeaways

  • The Chrome chain links 4 bugs: V8 heap corruption, a V8 sandbox escape that defeats ASLR, a CacheStorage race condition and a FedCM use-after-free; the PoC launches Calculator within seconds of a page loading in default Chrome on macOS
  • Per Anthropic, Google assigned 62 CVEs to its reports, all critical or high, including 13 sandbox escapes and 21 renderer-compromise bugs, fixed as of Chrome 156
  • The Windows kernel QUIC out-of-bounds read is CVE-2026-33096, with likely several million exposed servers by Anthropic's estimate; the Linux MPTCP zero-click root bug is CVE-2026-98432, where the PoC leaks a kernel pointer in about 48 minutes and reaches root command execution about 5 minutes later
  • Method: many parallel scanning agents scored by the extra vulnerabilities they add, with coverage tracking and automated variant analysis on every confirmed finding; Anthropic recommends scanning at PR time and has released a Claude Code security plugin
  • The model is an unnamed internal research model; Anthropic did not publish the share of human work, failed attempts or compute cost
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:
⚡ Claude (unreleased internal research model)🤖 Claude Code🌐 Anthropic🌐 Google🌐 Apple🌐 Microsoft

Cursor adds DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: all four effort levels sit on the CursorBench 4.0 cost frontier, with Max scoring 47.7% at $0.98 per task

Cursor announced on Oct 26 (UTC) that DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is now available in Cursor and can be turned on under Cursor Settings > Models. Cursor says every effort level sits on the CursorBench cost frontier, from $0.60 to $0.98 per task, with no model scoring higher at those prices. The official CursorBench 4.0 leaderboard lists DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 at 47.7% on Max ($0.98 per task), 46.3% on Medium ($0.80), 45.6% on High ($0.77) and 44.9% on Low ($0.60). The top score on the board, Opus 5.5 Max, is 57.8% but costs $13.43 per task.

Cursor adds DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: all four effort levels sit on the CursorBench 4.0 cost frontier, with Max scoring 47.7% at $0.98 per task

Key Takeaways

  • Four effort levels on the official CursorBench 4.0 board: Max 47.7% at $0.98, Medium 46.3% at $0.80, High 45.6% at $0.77, Low 44.9% at $0.60; Max ranks 17th overall
  • Value: Max at 47.7% nearly ties Sonnet 5.5 High (47.8%, $1.20) for about 18% less; Opus 5.5 Max scores about 10 points higher but costs $13.43 per task, roughly 13.7x more
  • Nearest rivals on price: Haiku 5.5 Max at 48.4% for $1.12 and Haiku 5.5 Extra High at 44.3% for $0.56, bracketing DeepSeek's price range
  • The trade-off is tokens and steps: Max averages about 537K tokens and 187 steps per task, versus about 37K tokens and 41 steps for Sonnet 5.5 High, so expect longer runs
  • Turn it on under Cursor Settings > Models; a counterintuitive detail is that Medium (46.3%) scores slightly above High (45.6%) for only $0.03 more
Read full story

OpenAI launches GPT-6.1 Terra: fast, low-cost computer use at $1/$5 per million tokens, half the price of GPT-5.6 Terra and GPT-6.1 Sol

On Oct 26 OpenAI released GPT-6.1 Terra, an efficient model for visual reasoning, precise computer use and natural writing. It is rolling out today to Plus, Pro, Enterprise and Edu users in ChatGPT Work and Codex, and in the API as gpt-6.1-terra. Standard API pricing is $1 input, $0.05 cached input and $5 output per million tokens, which OpenAI says is 50% lower than GPT-5.6 Terra and GPT-6.1 Sol, with a 1,050,000-token context window. By OpenAI's figures it scores 15 points higher than GPT-5.6 Terra on Agents' Last Exam at medium effort for about a third of the cost, and solves 50.3% of Terminal-Bench 4.0 at max effort.

OpenAI launches GPT-6.1 Terra: fast, low-cost computer use at $1/$5 per million tokens, half the price of GPT-5.6 Terra and GPT-6.1 Sol

Key Takeaways

  • Pricing (official docs): $1 input, $0.05 cached input, $1.25 for 30-minute cache writes and $5 output per million tokens; requests over 272K input tokens are billed at 2x input and 1.5x output; Batch/Flex are half price and Fast mode is 2x
  • Specs: 1,050,000-token context, 922,000 max input and 128,000 max output tokens, Jun 1 2026 knowledge cutoff; reasoning.effort from none to max, and tool calling requires the Responses API
  • Computer use (OpenAI figures): on Agents' Last Exam at medium effort it beats GPT-5.6 Terra by 15 points at about one-third the cost, and matches GPT-6 Astra at one-tenth the price per token; it finishes tasks over 3x faster than GPT-6 Astra and GPT-6.1 Sol
  • Coding and factuality (OpenAI figures): 50.3% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 at max effort, more than double GPT-5.6 Terra's published 21.5%; error rate on an internal error-inducing prompt set fell from 53.6% to 16.7% at low effort
  • Safety: OpenAI says it meets the Critical cybersecurity threshold under its Preparedness Framework and keeps the safeguards built for GPT-6 Astra
Read full story