HyperNova 60B 2605 (high, based on gpt-oss-120b) vs Step 3.5 Flash

HyperNova 60B 2605 (high, based on gpt-oss-120b) vs Step 3.5 Flash. A reliable intelligence-versus-cost verdict requires both models' intelligence scores and benchmark-run costs. Missing data is not a performance verdict.

Multiverse ComputingHyperNova 60B 2605 (high, based on gpt-oss-120b)Not ranked · benchmark data missing
Intelligence
11.70
Total cost
-
StepFunStep 3.5 FlashNot ranked · benchmark data missing
Intelligence
16.60
Total cost
-
Verdict

Comparison incomplete

A reliable intelligence-versus-cost verdict requires both models' intelligence scores and benchmark-run costs. Missing data is not a performance verdict.

MetricHyperNova 60B 2605 (high, based on gpt-oss-120b)Step 3.5 FlashDifference
Intelligence (higher is better)11.716.6+41.9% Step 3.5 Flash is 41.9% more intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)Not reportedNot reported— not comparable
End-to-end time (lower is better)7.76s12.13s+56.3% Step 3.5 Flash is 56.3% slower
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)$0.04 / $0.14$0.10 / $0.30
Input modalitiesNot reportedNot reported
Open this matchup in the interactive pickerHyperNova 60B 2605 (high, based on gpt-oss-120b): what beats itStep 3.5 Flash: what beats it
Matchup

Compare something else

Agents: Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/hypernova-60b/step-3-5-flash-0202 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/hypernova-60b/step-3-5-flash-0202?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill