vakati-tech.ai

// head_to_head

GPT-6.1 Terra vs UnslopNemo 12B

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

UnslopNemo 12B is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here.

UnslopNemo 12B 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.

openai

GPT-6.1 Terra

Blended / 1M
$2.00
Context
1.1M
Released
Oct 26, 2026
Overall score
77.8
reasoningtool callingfile inputimage inputprompt caching

thedrummer

UnslopNemo 12B

Blended / 1M
$0.400
Context
1.0M
Released
Nov 8, 2024
Overall score
Not evaluated

Specs and pricing

MetricGPT-6.1 TerraUnslopNemo 12B
LiveBench overall

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

77.8—
Cost per point

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

$0.0067—
Blended price / 1M

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

$2.00$0.400win
Input price / 1M$1.00$0.400win
Output price / 1M$5.00$0.400win
Cached input / 1M

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

$0.050—
Context window1.1M1.0M
Max output tokens128K819Kwin

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — GPT-6.1 Terra on top, UnslopNemo 12B below, both out of 100.

Long-horizon agentic
48.6
—
Coding
94.3
—
Reasoning
88.7
—
Browser
93.1
—
Data analysis
82.3
—
Research
73.9
—
Documents & design
82.3
—

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.

WorkloadGPT-6.1 TerraUnslopNemo 12B
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$571.60/mo$128.00/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$720.00/mo$344.00/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$668.00/mo$352.00/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$1,328/mo$430.00/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$2,525/mo$1,040/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You are cost-constrained

UnslopNemo 12B

Cheaper on blended list price at $0.400 per million tokens.

GPT-6.1 Terra vs UnslopNemo 12B FAQ

Which is better, GPT-6.1 Terra or UnslopNemo 12B?

UnslopNemo 12B is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here. UnslopNemo 12B 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 GPT-6.1 Terra cheaper than UnslopNemo 12B?

UnslopNemo 12B is cheaper. On a 3:1 input:output blend, GPT-6.1 Terra lists at $2.00 per million tokens and UnslopNemo 12B at $0.400 — UnslopNemo 12B is 5.0× cheaper. Input and output are priced separately — GPT-6.1 Terra charges $1.00 in and $5.00 out, UnslopNemo 12B charges $0.400 and $0.400 — so the model that looks cheaper flips depending on how output-heavy your workload is.

Does GPT-6.1 Terra or UnslopNemo 12B have a bigger context window?

They are effectively the same — 1.1M for GPT-6.1 Terra and 1.0M for UnslopNemo 12B.

Do GPT-6.1 Terra and UnslopNemo 12B support prompt caching?

GPT-6.1 Terra publishes a cached-input rate of $0.050 per million tokens against a full input rate of $1.00. The catalogue lists no separate cached rate for UnslopNemo 12B, which means the provider does not price it separately here — not that caching is unavailable.

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.
  • Scores — LiveBench release 2026-10-25, 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.