Pick GPT-6 Astra for computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%) or cybersecurity exploit development (exploitbench 100%). Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. Choose Laguna XS 2.1 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; GPT-6 Astra if you want a managed API.
GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI) and Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. GPT-6 Astra is openAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: Laguna XS 2.1 is about 100× cheaper on input ($0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens vs $10/$50 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
Context window: GPT-6 Astra holds 4× more — 1.05M tokens (~1,575 pages) vs 256K (~393 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: GPT-6 Astra is the newer model by about 2 months (released September 3, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
GPT-6 Astra
Laguna XS 2.1
Provider
OpenAI (US)
Poolside (US)
Released
September 3, 2026
July 2, 2026
Context window
1.05M tokens (~1,575 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
$10/$50 per 1M tokens
$0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
70.9%
MRCR v2 @ 1M
96.3%
Not published
Who wins what
Computer & browser use (ScreenSpot-Pro 92.7%): GPT-6 Astra — OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks — and it carries the larger 1.05M tokens context.
Cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%): GPT-6 Astra — OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks — and it is the newer of the two.
Frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%): GPT-6 Astra — GPT-6 Astra lists frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%) among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters: Laguna XS 2.1 — A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven — and it runs cheaper at $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens.
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime: Laguna XS 2.1 — Open weights make this possible at all — GPT-6 Astra is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price: Laguna XS 2.1 — At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts GPT-6 Astra ($10/$50 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Lowest cost at scale: Laguna XS 2.1 — At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input: GPT-6 Astra — Its 1.05M tokens window is about 4× larger than Laguna XS 2.1's 256K, fitting roughly 1,575 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Laguna XS 2.1 — At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts GPT-6 Astra, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: GPT-6 Astra — Larger 1.05M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: Laguna XS 2.1 — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; GPT-6 Astra is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%): GPT-6 Astra — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters: Laguna XS 2.1 — That is its strongest area.
GPT-6 Astra: where it fits
OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks. Released September 3, 2026 by OpenAI, it is built for computer & browser use (ScreenSpot-Pro 92.7%), cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%), frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%), and long-context recall (MRCR v2 512K-1M: 96.3%).
Its trade-offs are real: no native audio or video input, pricing doubles for prompts over 272K tokens (input/cache 2x, output 1.5x), trails Meta's Muse Spark 1.3 on some coding evals (DeepSWE v1.1: 74.1 vs 75.4), and a separate opt-in "Daybreak" program gives vetted cybersecurity defenders a less-restricted version for legitimate vulnerability research; the public version already refuses ~91.5% of offensive cyber jailbreak attempts by default. At $10 in / $50 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Laguna XS 2.1 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. GPT-6 Astra gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6 Astra or Laguna XS 2.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for GPT-6 Astra, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, GPT-6 Astra leans toward computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%) while Laguna XS 2.1 leans toward remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6 Astra or Laguna XS 2.1?
Laguna XS 2.1 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while GPT-6 Astra is API-metered at $10/$50 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Astra — 1.05M tokens vs 256K, about 4× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both GPT-6 Astra and Laguna XS 2.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you GPT-6 Astra, Laguna XS 2.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, GPT-6 Astra or Laguna XS 2.1?
GPT-6 Astra — released September 3, 2026, about 2 months after Laguna XS 2.1.
GPT-6 Astra vs Laguna XS 2.1
OpenAI · US | Poolside · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick GPT-6 Astra for computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%) or cybersecurity exploit development (exploitbench 100%). Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. Choose Laguna XS 2.1 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; GPT-6 Astra if you want a managed API.
GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI) and Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. GPT-6 Astra is openAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Laguna XS 2.1 is about 100× cheaper on input ($0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens vs $10/$50 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
▸Context window: GPT-6 Astra holds 4× more — 1.05M tokens (~1,575 pages) vs 256K (~393 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: GPT-6 Astra is the newer model by about 2 months (released September 3, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
GPT-6 Astra
Laguna XS 2.1
Provider
OpenAI (US)
Poolside (US)
Released
September 3, 2026
July 2, 2026
Context window
1.05M tokens (~1,575 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
$10/$50 per 1M tokens
$0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
70.9%
MRCR v2 @ 1M
96.3%
Not published
Who wins what
Computer & browser use (ScreenSpot-Pro 92.7%)
GPT-6 Astra
OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks — and it carries the larger 1.05M tokens context.
Cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%)
GPT-6 Astra
OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks — and it is the newer of the two.
Frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%)
GPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra lists frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%) among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters
Laguna XS 2.1
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven — and it runs cheaper at $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens.
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime
Laguna XS 2.1
Open weights make this possible at all — GPT-6 Astra is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price
Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts GPT-6 Astra ($10/$50 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Lowest cost at scale
Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
GPT-6 Astra
Its 1.05M tokens window is about 4× larger than Laguna XS 2.1's 256K, fitting roughly 1,575 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts GPT-6 Astra, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ GPT-6 Astra
Larger 1.05M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ Laguna XS 2.1
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; GPT-6 Astra is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%)
→ GPT-6 Astra
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters
→ Laguna XS 2.1
That is its strongest area.
GPT-6 Astra: where it fits
OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks. Released September 3, 2026 by OpenAI, it is built for computer & browser use (ScreenSpot-Pro 92.7%), cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%), frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%), and long-context recall (MRCR v2 512K-1M: 96.3%).
Its trade-offs are real: no native audio or video input, pricing doubles for prompts over 272K tokens (input/cache 2x, output 1.5x), trails Meta's Muse Spark 1.3 on some coding evals (DeepSWE v1.1: 74.1 vs 75.4), and a separate opt-in "Daybreak" program gives vetted cybersecurity defenders a less-restricted version for legitimate vulnerability research; the public version already refuses ~91.5% of offensive cyber jailbreak attempts by default. At $10 in / $50 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Laguna XS 2.1 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. GPT-6 Astra gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both GPT-6 Astra and Laguna XS 2.1 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is GPT-6 Astra or Laguna XS 2.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for GPT-6 Astra, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, GPT-6 Astra leans toward computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%) while Laguna XS 2.1 leans toward remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6 Astra or Laguna XS 2.1?
Laguna XS 2.1 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while GPT-6 Astra is API-metered at $10/$50 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Astra — 1.05M tokens vs 256K, about 4× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both GPT-6 Astra and Laguna XS 2.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you GPT-6 Astra, Laguna XS 2.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, GPT-6 Astra or Laguna XS 2.1?
GPT-6 Astra — released September 3, 2026, about 2 months after Laguna XS 2.1.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.