pvakati-tech.ai

// head_to_head

Aion 3.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

Aion 3.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol are priced within ~10% of each other.

Aion 3.5 does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

aion-labs

Aion 3.5

Blended / 1M
$3.75
Context
262K
Released
Sep 23, 2026
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoningtool callingprompt caching

openai

GPT-5.6 Sol

Blended / 1M
$4.00
Context
1.1M
Released
Jul 9, 2026
Overall score
81.1
reasoningtool callingfile inputimage inputprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricAion 3.5GPT-5.6 Sol
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

81.1
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.2870
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$3.75$4.00
Input price / 1M$3.00$2.00win
Output price / 1M$6.00win$10.00
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.750$0.200win
Context window262K1.1Mwin
Max output tokens33K128Kwin

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — Aion 3.5 on top, GPT-5.6 Sol below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
56.2
Coding
83.9
Reasoning
91.7
Mathematics
96.2
Data analysis
79.8
Language
87.7
Instruction following
71.8

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadAion 3.5GPT-5.6 Sol
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$1,038/mo$1,150/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$1,860/mo$1,480/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$1,620/mo$1,392/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$3,338/mo$2,660/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$6,975/mo$5,100/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You need to fit large documents in one call

GPT-5.6 Sol

Wider context window — 1.1M against 262K.

Aion 3.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol FAQ

Which is better, Aion 3.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?

Aion 3.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol are priced within ~10% of each other. Aion 3.5 does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is Aion 3.5 cheaper than GPT-5.6 Sol?

They cost about the same. Both land near $3.75 per million tokens on a 3:1 input:output blend, so price is unlikely to be the deciding factor between them.

Does Aion 3.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol have a bigger context window?

GPT-5.6 Sol has the larger context window: 262K for Aion 3.5 against 1.1M for GPT-5.6 Sol. Note that a window you can fill is not a window you should fill — retrieval quality usually degrades well before the limit, and you pay for every token you put in it.

Do Aion 3.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol support prompt caching?

Both publish a cached-input rate: $0.750 per million for Aion 3.5 and $0.200 for GPT-5.6 Sol, against full input rates of $3.00 and $2.00. On a workload with a long stable prefix — a system prompt, a tool schema, a retrieved corpus — that changes the economics more than the headline price does.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.