Good enough on 25/53 tasks at the 90% bar. Best value on 20 tasks. Best fit for: Structured Data & Fact Extraction, Financial Analysis & Trading Decisions, Infrastructure & Utility, Long-form Content Generation, Relevance, Classification & Matching, Social & Promotional Content, Content Summarization & Synthesis, Topic Organization & Clustering.
Cost vs quality across all tasks, as of 24 September 2026
within ~1.3× of the best-value model ·
1.3–2× ·
>2× ·
★ this model is the best-value pick on that task.
Top-right = best quadrant. Only tasks where this model qualifies at the 90% bar are plotted.
Overpay — how much more you pay by running this model instead of the best-value model that clears the
quality bar on that task (marked ★). "16x" means you overpay 16× — the same output for 16× the best-value good-enough option;
★ means this model is that option (no overpayment).
Confidence — how sure we are about the quality score (more judgments + more agreement = higher confidence):
RANKED many independent judges scored this model's outputs and their agreement is very high (most confident) —
HIGH many judges have scored it and they mostly agree (well-pinned) —
MEDIUM enough judges have weighed in to publish, but they disagree more than we'd like (treat with a small grain of salt).
LOW-confidence cells are hidden everywhere on the site.
See the methodology for the exact thresholds.
