GPT-6.1 Terra is released, comment section: it's a total flop.

On the same day Anthropic officially submitted its IPO prospectus to the public, OpenAI released its new model GPT-6.1 Terra.

This is the first update to the Terra series after more than three months, and 27 days have passed since the release of GPT-6.1 Sol on September 29. OpenAI emphasized in its official promotion: "Deliver fast and powerful computer operation capabilities at a lower price."

But netizens don't seem to buy it.

"Dude, what we need is a model stronger than Opus 5.5. No one cares if it's faster or cheaper."

This netizen bluntly stated that he has almost stopped using the Codex subscription service because it is practically useless.

Over the past period, Anthropic has gained a lot of attention in fields such as programming with Claude Opus 5.5. Many users were expecting OpenAI to come up with a powerful model that can compete head-on, but what they got in the end is a mid-range model that focuses on cost-effectiveness.

It can only be said that it is hard not to be disappointed.

"Nothing Special"

The API price of GPT-6.1 Terra is $1 per million input Tokens, $0.05 per million cached input Tokens, and $5 per million output Tokens, which is 50% and about 58% lower than the input and output prices of the previous generation respectively, and is only half of that of GPT-6.1 Sol.

According to the data released by OpenAI, Terra has significantly improved compared to the previous generation in programming, visual understanding, computer operation and other aspects.

In the Terminal-Bench 4.0 test that measures the capabilities of AI programming Agents, Terra's task completion rate increased from 21.5% of the previous generation to 50.3%.

In the Agents' Last Exam test, Terra scored 60.0%, close to Claude Opus 5.5's 63.2%.

OpenAI specifically emphasized that under the highest reasoning gear of this computer operation test, Terra can achieve close results at about 1/9 of the task cost of Opus 5.5.

But in the third-party evaluation, the performance of 6.1 Terra is not outstanding.

According to tests by Artificial Analysis, an independent AI evaluation agency, under the highest reasoning gear, Terra's intelligence index is 48 points, 6 points higher than the previous generation, but still lower than GPT-6.1 Sol's 52 points, not to mention Claude Opus 5.5's 58 points.

Relatively speaking, the improvement in cost efficiency is relatively obvious.

Artificial Analysis found that in its comprehensive intelligence evaluation, the average cost for Terra to complete a single task dropped from $1.40 to $0.40, a decrease of more than 70%.

To put it bluntly, 6.1 Terra is roughly a "mediocre" model. Its price is neither high nor low, and its capabilities are neither good nor bad. It does have progress compared with the previous generation, but it does not even surpass OpenAI's own Sol, let alone catch up with Opus 5.5.

For developers who need to call models at low cost, this may be good news.

But for users who are waiting for OpenAI to launch its next top-tier model, I'm afraid there is only one evaluation: Is that all?

At present, Terra is available via API, and Plus, Pro, Enterprise and Edu users can also use it in ChatGPT Work and Codex, but it cannot be called in ordinary Chat conversations for the time being.

Beyond Benchmarks

GPT-6.1 Terra is also included in OpenAI's 28-day consecutive update plan, becoming the first new model released during this period.

Tibo said that this is OpenAI's first model that has made significant progress in writing, model personality, and delicate understanding of user needs.

He also emphasized that the new model performs well in all aspects, especially good at computer operation, and can provide twice the usage volume compared with GPT-6.1 Sol in APIs and subscription services.

However, there is still a lack of sufficient public evidence for the writing, personality and delicate understanding capabilities that Tibo specially emphasized.

OpenAI's official release did claim that Terra can generate clearer and more natural text, but it did not provide special comparative tests for the above three capabilities, nor did it show evaluation results sufficient to prove its significant progress.

Whether it is really better at writing and understanding users, I am afraid we still have to wait for feedback after actual use.

The improvements in computer operation are relatively intuitive. In the promotional video, OpenAI demonstrated Terra's ability to create 3D models from images.

However, a promotional video is just a promotional video after all.

OpenAI also mentioned in its official release that the benchmark tests that Terra participated in include tasks such as creating 3D models from architectural drawings, checking animations frame by frame and sorting out time codes. According to the official product positioning, it is also suitable for daily work such as filling out forms, matching product photos with catalog entries.

Sam Altman posted on X: "GPT-6.1 Terra is here! It excels at many things, but we are especially looking forward to this new era of computer operation."

In addition to task execution, OpenAI also emphasized improvements in model reliability.

In the specially designed official high-difficulty factuality test, under the low reasoning gear, Terra's factual error rate dropped from 53.6% of the previous generation to 16.7%; under the highest reasoning gear, the error rate further dropped to 4.3%.

Of course, these figures come from OpenAI's internal tests.

Netizens: I Can't Understand It

Compared with the excitement of OpenAI officials, netizens' attitudes are not so polite.

"Is there any reason to choose this instead of Opus 5.5?"

Some netizens directly questioned OpenAI, saying that what they really need is a cutting-edge model stronger than GPT-6 Astra.

Other netizens questioned why the officials did not provide more benchmarks, didn't they just throw out a table directly before?

In addition, some netizens said they have experienced the new model, and its computer operation capability is even worse than 6.1 Sol, and the speed is not as fast as advertised.

"What we need is a better product, not this useless thing."

Similar dissatisfaction also appeared on the Reddit community.

In r/codex, a netizen directly posted a post describing this release as "basically advertising for Claude".

Some people think the awkward part of Terra lies in its positioning. One netizen pointed out that Terra's API price is 10 times that of Luna.

If you pursue the lowest cost, you can use Luna; if you need a stronger model, Sol seems more reasonable.

Even OpenAI's naming method was complained. Since the release time of each tier of models is not uniform, and the performance of different models on some tasks will cross, some users have been confused about how to choose between Terra, Sol and Astra.

Facing these questions, OpenAI researcher Ted Sanders also gave an explanation on Hacker News. He said that Terra may be better than Sol and Astra in technical communication, with close performance in visual understanding and computer operation, and faster speed, but slightly worse in most other tasks.

For subscription users, he also admitted: "This is not a blockbuster release."