Compare AI models

Specifications
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one.
—21B
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view.
—128k
API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page.
—$0.018Darkbloom
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input.
—$0.09Darkbloom
—$8.10Darkbloom · fp8
Benchmarks
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better.
33%60.7%
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better.
50.4%71.5%
Overview
CompanyAnthropicOpenAI
Release dateMar 4 2024Aug 5 2025
AccessClosedOpen Weight
Model detailsView modelView model

Frequently asked questions

gpt-oss-20b leads Claude 3 Opus on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Verified, GPQA Diamond). Claude 3 Opus shipped 519 days before gpt-oss-20b, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.

Claude 3 Opus is closed, while gpt-oss-20b is open weight.

On SWE-Bench Verified, gpt-oss-20b leads at 60.7% vs Claude 3 Opus at 33%. On GPQA Diamond, gpt-oss-20b leads at 71.5% vs Claude 3 Opus at 50.4%.