Model Comparison
GPT-6.1 Sol vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
Overlapping ranges: the best configurations, GPT-6.1 Sol (max) and Kimi K3.1 Pro (max), are 2 Elo apart, and their 95% ranges overlap. Among 84 models, each ranked by its best configuration, GPT-6.1 Sol is #7 and Kimi K3.1 Pro is #8. Cost per script: $0.239 for GPT-6.1 Sol (max) and $0.251 for Kimi K3.1 Pro (max).
Last updated , from board data generated at 20:15 UTC.
Picks and Verdict
PickGPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh)
Pick GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) for less slop and tighter length at $0.199 a script, with an individual Elo range that overlaps Kimi's.
PickKimi K3.1 Pro
Kimi K3.1 Pro (max)
Pick Kimi K3.1 Pro (max) when you want the draft in 5.5 minutes instead of 10.2, with the edge on continuity and visual cues, at $0.251.
The Elo point estimates are close, and speed is the clearest difference. GPT-6.1 Sol is the #7 model of 84 and Kimi K3.1 Pro the #8 model, each ranked by its best setting. At max, the one level name they share, GPT-6.1 Sol (max) sits 2 Elo above Kimi K3.1 Pro (max), the 95% ranges overlap and the ten scripts split five each; that overlap alone does not test their difference. The price is about the same, $0.239 against $0.251, but Sol takes 10.2 minutes where Kimi finishes in 5.5. Sol at xhigh also overlaps Kimi, at $0.199 and 7.8 minutes. Lower down, Sol's ladder is uneven: low rates above high and medium for less money, and going from low to max adds 142 Elo for about 4.6 times the cost. Kimi only runs at max, so I'd hold it against Sol's top two. The metrics split by type. Sol at max has 3.2 points less slop, lands the length 2.6 points closer and scores a little higher on tone. Kimi leads continuity by 1.6, visual cues by 1.9 and YouTube best practices by 1.1. I'd take Sol at xhigh to save a few cents, and Kimi when I want the draft sooner.
Disclosure: GPT-6.1 Sol comes from the same lab as one of the four judges, GPT-6.1 Sol. The other three sit outside its lab, so it is never scored by its own lab alone (how the panel works). The judge analysis measures how much each judge favors its own lab.
How to Read the Writing Score, Writing Elo and 95% Ranges
Writing Score and Writing Elo. The Writing Score (0 to 100) is the weighted average of the nine metric scores: seven from the judges, Length Adherence from code and the Slop Score half from each. The Writing Elo is a rating from pairwise comparisons: on each script, each configuration's average across its drafts is compared with every other configuration's, and gaps within the draft-to-draft variation count as draws. Elo rewards winning often, so the two can put configurations in a different order.
Elo ranges. Each 95% range shows how far a configuration's Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently. It comes from resampling every configuration's recorded draft scores on each reference script and ranking again. Comparing two separate ranges does not test the Elo gap between them: ranges far apart are strong evidence for the order, and overlapping ranges do not mean a tie. The reference scripts stay fixed, so the ranges say nothing about new scripts. The methodology page has the full description.
All Thinking Levels of Both Models
Every ranked configuration of GPT-6.1 Sol and Kimi K3.1 Pro, scored on the same 10 scripts by the same four judges.
- Each row is one configuration: the model at one thinking level. The dot is its Writing Elo, a rating from pairwise comparisons of the scores on each script, and the bar is its 95% range: how far that Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently.
- Each bar describes one configuration. Overlap alone does not establish a tie or decide their order. Comparing these ranges does not directly test the difference between a pair.
- The table under the chart lists the same configurations in the same order and adds the Writing Score (the 0 to 100 consensus of the judges and code), cost, time and configuration rank (the place among all configurations on the board).
Shaded rows are the configurations chosen for the metric comparison below.
| Configuration | Writing Elo | 95% Range | Writing Score | Cost / Script | Time / Script | Reasoning Tokens | Configuration Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6.1 Sol (max) | 2193 | 2151 to 2230 | 82.4 | $0.239 | 10.2 min | N/A | #13 |
| Kimi K3.1 Pro (max) | 2191 | 2148 to 2231 | 82.5 | $0.251 | 5.5 min | 19,487 | #14 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) | 2165 | 2125 to 2202 | 82.4 | $0.199 | 7.8 min | N/A | #20 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol (low) | 2051 | 2013 to 2083 | 81.4 | $0.052 | 1.5 min | N/A | #26 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol (high) | 2013 | 1969 to 2056 | 81.1 | $0.094 | 3.3 min | N/A | #29 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol (medium) | 1998 | 1963 to 2029 | 81.0 | $0.054 | 1.6 min | N/A | #32 |
Cost is one script at the API list price of the route used, uncached and without judging. Time is the average for one accepted script, retries included. N/A under Reasoning Tokens means the board has no separate reasoning count for that route.
Computed Findings Across Thinking Levels
Each finding is computed from the configurations above. The 95% ranges describe individual configurations; overlap alone establishes neither a tie nor an order for a pair.
- Best Configurations Head to Head. GPT-6.1 Sol (max) at Elo 2193 (range 2151 to 2230) and Kimi K3.1 Pro (max) at Elo 2191 (range 2148 to 2231) have overlapping 95% ranges.
- Same Level Name, Side by Side. At max, the one level name both models use, GPT-6.1 Sol has the higher Writing Elo: 2193 against 2191. Their 95% ranges overlap there. Level names come from each provider, so the same name does not promise the same reasoning budget.
- Cheapest Configuration Overlapping the Top One. GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh), at $0.199 per script, is the cheapest configuration whose 95% range overlaps that of GPT-6.1 Sol (max), at $0.239 per script: 2125 to 2202 against 2151 to 2230. GPT-6.1 Sol (max) costs about 1.2 times as much per script.
- Cheapest GPT-6.1 Sol Configuration Above Kimi K3.1 Pro's Best. The cheapest GPT-6.1 Sol configuration with a higher Writing Elo than Kimi K3.1 Pro (max), at Elo 2191 and $0.251 per script, is GPT-6.1 Sol (max), at Elo 2193 and $0.239 per script. Their 95% ranges overlap. It costs less than the configuration it beats.
- Lowest to Highest Thinking Level. GPT-6.1 Sol moves +142 Elo from low to max, at about 4.6 times the cost per script.
Two Chosen Configurations Compared
Pick one configuration of each model to compare their metric scores, consistency across drafts and per-script scores. Each menu starts on the model's best configuration.
Scores by Metric
GPT-6.1 Sol (max) scores higher on four of the nine metrics and Kimi K3.1 Pro (max) on five. Weighted by each metric's share of the Writing Score, Continuity & Emotion does the most to put Kimi K3.1 Pro (max) ahead, with a 1.6-point lead on that metric. The weight beside each metric is its share of the Writing Score.
Consistency Across Drafts
| GPT-6.1 Sol (max) | Kimi K3.1 Pro (max) | |
|---|---|---|
| Score spread across drafts (±) | 1.40 | 1.65 |
| Lowest script score | 80.6 Script 10 | 80.4 Script 7 |
| Highest script score | 85.0 Script 9 | 85.5 Script 9 |
| Range across scripts | 4.4 | 5.1 |
Spread is how much the Writing Score moves between a configuration's drafts, and lower is steadier. Green marks the better number in each row.
Scores by Script
Writing Score on each reference script. Gap is GPT-6.1 Sol (max) minus Kimi K3.1 Pro (max), and the higher score is in bold.
| Script | GPT-6.1 Sol (max) | Kimi K3.1 Pro (max) | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Script 1 opinion / warning explainer | 81.7 | 81.3 | +0.4 |
| Script 2 news-analysis / skeptical explainer | 82.5 | 83.2 | -0.7 |
| Script 3 personal roadmap / opinion | 83.6 | 81.9 | +1.7 |
| Script 4 short explainer | 82.5 | 82.0 | +0.5 |
| Script 5 news-analysis / opinion explainer | 82.0 | 84.2 | -2.2 |
| Script 6 founder announcement / personal origin story | 83.3 | 83.0 | +0.3 |
| Script 7 personal technical walkthrough / agentic workflow case study | 82.2 | 80.4 | +1.8 |
| Script 8 product release announcement / personal observation | 81.0 | 82.1 | -1.1 |
| Script 9 career guide / hiring analysis | 85.0 | 85.5 | -0.5 |
| Script 10 engineering process walkthrough / presentation adaptation | 80.6 | 81.3 | -0.7 |
Scorecards and Thinking Pages
Each configuration name in the table above opens its own scorecard.
Compare With Another Model
Pick a second model. A pair with its own written match-up opens that page, and any other pair opens in the comparison tool.
Nearby Match-Ups by Best Writing Elo
Every configuration wrote five drafts for each of the same 10 briefs, from the same prompt. Generation was closed-book, with the prompt as the only source and no web search or other tools. Each judge scores every draft once: Claude Opus 5.5 at medium effort through the Claude Code subscription, GPT-6.1 Sol at medium reasoning through the Codex CLI, GLM 5.3 Flash through OpenRouter, and Jev 1.13, a typed judge from TypeSafe that answers each metric as a multiple-choice question. The channel's finished script is their reference for the voice, and it gets no score on the board itself.
← All comparisons