{"id":21173,"date":"2026-10-27T05:01:09","date_gmt":"2026-10-27T09:01:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wp.glbgpt.com\/?p=21173"},"modified":"2026-10-27T05:50:43","modified_gmt":"2026-10-27T09:50:43","slug":"gpt-6-1-terra-vs-sol","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wp.glbgpt.com\/hub\/zh\/gpt-6-1-terra-vs-sol","title":{"rendered":"GPT-6.1 Terra \u4e0e Sol \u5bf9\u6bd4\uff1a2026 \u5e74 Terra \u548c Sol \u54ea\u4e2a\u66f4\u80dc\u4e00\u7b79\uff1f"},"content":{"rendered":"

GPT-6.1 Terra is the better value for visual reasoning, precise computer-use planning, and natural writing; GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger default for complex coding and deeper professional work.<\/strong> Terra costs $1 per million input tokens and $5 for output at Standard rates. Sol costs $2 and $10. Both expose a 1.05M-token context window, 128K output, image input, and broad tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The models overlap enough that a universal winner would be misleading. Terra adds a \u65e0<\/code> reasoning option and a newer June 1, 2026 knowledge cutoff, while Sol is positioned closer to flagship capability. The practical choice depends on cost per accepted result: can Terra pass the same tests, or does Sol reduce enough failures and revisions to earn its two-times-higher uncached input and output bill?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n
\u8bd5\u7a7f GlobalGPT<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n