Celeris-1 vs GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Celeris-1 by Celeris or GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) scores 14.5 points higher (20.8 vs 6.3) but costs 4.3× as much to run the benchmark ($256 vs $60.0; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) when you need intelligence above 6.3, and Celeris-1 when 6.3 is enough.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 6.3 | 20.8 | +230.2% GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-re… is 3.3× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $59.99 | $255.77 | +326.4% GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-re… is 4.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 0.86s | 5.09s | +491.9% GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-re… is 491.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $0.70 | $2.00 / $12.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) vs Celeris-1: 230.2% more intelligence, 326.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 491.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Celeris-1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Medium) scores 34.50 for $56.4.
- GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Celeris-1GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/celeris-1/gpt-5-6-terra-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/celeris-1/gpt-5-6-terra-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill