AI Models · Open-Source vs Paid

Step 3.7 Flash Open vs GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) Paid

Step 3.7 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Can the open-source model replace the paid one? Full 2026 breakdown.

Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai

Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.

Step 3.7 FlashOpenStepfun
$0.2 /M input
$1.15 /M outputNo per-token fees if you self-host
TypeOpen-weight
Context window262K tokens
MultimodalYes
Self-hostYes
GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch)PaidOpenAI
$5 /M input
$25 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
TypeProprietary
Context window1.1M tokens
MultimodalYes
Self-hostNo
Choose Step 3.7 Flash if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

Step 3.7 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) specs

SpecStep 3.7 FlashGPT-6 Astra Pro (batch)Winner
MakerStepfunOpenAI
TypeOpen-weightProprietaryStep 3.7 Flash
Context window262K tokens1.1M tokensGPT-6 Astra Pro (batch)
Input price$0.2/M · free self-host$5/MStep 3.7 Flash
Output price$1.15/M · free self-host$25/MStep 3.7 Flash
Vision / multimodalYesYes= Tie
Tool / function callingYesYes= Tie
Self-hostableYesNo (API only)Step 3.7 Flash
LicenseOpen weightsProprietaryStep 3.7 Flash

Price gap & when to choose each

22×cheaper per output token

Step 3.7 Flash is ~22× cheaper than GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) on output tokens ($1.15 vs $25 per M tokens).

Choose Step 3.7 Flash if…
  • You want to self-host or run on your cloud
  • You prioritize data privacy & control
  • You want the lowest operating costs
  • You are building open or reproducible AI
Choose GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) if…
  • You want frontier performance through a managed API
  • You need the longer 1.1M context window
  • You value reliability & ecosystem
  • You don't want to manage infrastructure

Feature comparison

CapabilityStep 3.7 FlashGPT-6 Astra Pro (batch)
Open weights (downloadable)
Self-hostable
Runs fully offline
Vision / multimodal
Tool / function calling
1M+ context window

Benchmarks: Step 3.7 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch)

Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).

Step 3.7 Flash
GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch)
Intelligence index
19.5
Coding index
39.6
GPQA
80.9%
Humanity's Last Exam
21.4%
Long Context Reasoning
73.7%
SciCode
43.9%
IFBench
67.3%
τ²-Bench
98.5%
τ-Bench Banking
12%
Terminal-Bench
39.3%
Terminal-Bench Hard
35.6%
Speed
132.8 tok/s
Latency
1.59s
Intelligence per $
44.5

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How Step 3.7 Flash and GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) score

🏆 Best value & openness: Step 3.7 Flash (4.7 vs 3.1 / 5)
CriterionStep 3.7 FlashGPT-6 Astra Pro (batch)
Cost-efficiency4.53.0
Context window4.05.0
Openness5.01.5
Self-hosting5.01.0
Multimodality5.05.0

Scores come from live data — output price (cost), context length, open vs closed weights (openness & self-hosting) and vision/tool support (multimodality). Raw task quality isn't scored here; it depends on your benchmark — see the verdict.

What each model is

Step 3.7 Flash Open

Stepfun · Open-weight

Step 3.7 Flash is StepFun's latest high-efficiency multimodal Mixture-of-Experts model. It pairs a 196B-parameter language backbone with a vision encoder for native image and video understanding, activating roughly 11B parameters...

GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) Paid

OpenAI · Proprietary

GPT-6 Astra Pro is the same underlying model as [GPT-6 Astra](https://openrouter.ai/openai/gpt-6-astra), served with `reasoning.mode` set to `pro` for higher-quality responses on complex tasks. Learn more in OpenAI's docs: https://develope

Other models in these families

These variants are tracked but not compared here — one page per family keeps the comparison readable.

Other variants tracked
Step 3.5 Flash

Frequently asked questions

Is Step 3.7 Flash as good as GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch)?

Step 3.7 Flash is open-weight and competitive on many tasks, but GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) may still lead on the hardest reasoning and agentic work. The gap keeps narrowing — benchmark both on your actual use case before deciding.

Can I run Step 3.7 Flash locally?

Yes. Step 3.7 Flash has open weights, so you can self-host it on your own GPUs or run it via a low-cost API. GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) is API-only and cannot be self-hosted.

How much cheaper is Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash costs $1.15/M output vs $25/M for GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) — roughly 22x cheaper via API, and free if you self-host.

Step 3.7 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) — which should I pick in 2026?

Choose Step 3.7 Flash if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose GPT-6 Astra Pro (batch) if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

People also compare

Explore more open-source AI

Browse the full open-source model leaderboard, thousands of tools and live benchmarks — all in one place.

Open the leaderboard →