gpt-oss-20b vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B: which should you choose in 2026?
gpt-oss-20b (by OpenAI) and Beam 1.0 501B A23B (by Reflection) are compared below. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price, and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.
There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader.
gpt-oss-20b is about 13.2× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($0.036 vs $0.475 per 1M tokens).
Beam 1.0 501B A23B has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 131,072 tokens).
Choose gpt-oss-20b if…
- • lower blended API cost matters for your workload
Choose Beam 1.0 501B A23B if…
- • you work with longer documents, transcripts, or codebases
The benchmark count includes only results measured with a matching benchmark version and protocol. Arena scores are shown separately. Missing, preliminary, and incompatible data is not treated as a controlled win. Published point-score comparisons are labeled separately when protocol details are incomplete. For text-output models, the verdict also compares token pricing and context windows.
Performance benchmarks
Every value links to its source. A dash means that no reviewed result is available for that exact model and protocol.
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-20b | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
|---|---|---|
A 657-task benchmark of multi-step work across simulated SaaS applications in six business domains. The Artificial Analysis protocol reports a guardrail-aware score and is distinct from both the public Zapier split and the unrelated dynamic AutoBench framework. Guardrail-aware score | — | — |
A benchmark of difficult, verifiable information-seeking questions designed to measure an agent's ability to locate hard-to-find facts through web browsing. Accuracy | — | — |
A verified computer-use benchmark in which multimodal agents operate desktop applications and are graded from the resulting environment state. Mean task reward | — | — |
A human-validated subset of real GitHub issues used to measure whether a coding agent can produce repository patches that resolve the associated tests. Resolved | — | — |
Version 2.1 of the benchmark for completing realistic tasks in terminal environments. Harness, resource limits, and attempt count are part of the protocol. Mean task success | — | — |
A dynamic LLM evaluation framework in which models generate questions, answer them, and participate in reciprocal peer assessment. AutoBench is distinct from Zapier's AutomationBench. Weighted peer-assessment score | — | — |
The highest-quality subset of Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A, designed to test expert-level scientific reasoning in biology, physics, and chemistry. Accuracy | — | — |
A 2,500-question expert-level benchmark spanning dozens of academic fields. Tool-assisted and no-tools results are separate protocols and must not be merged. Accuracy | — | — |
| Arena preference scores | ||
Human preference score | 1318 ±6 | — |
Benchmark sources
Reviewed evidence last updated 2026-08-09. Arena data last refreshed Oct 5, 2026.
Pricing, capabilities, and model facts
| Feature | gpt-oss-20b | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
|---|---|---|
| Context & model facts | ||
| Developer | OpenAI | Reflection |
| API provider | OpenAI | Reflection |
| Input context | 131,072 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Maximum output | 32,768 tokens | 943,718 tokens |
| Released | — | — |
| Added to Writingmate | Aug 5, 2025 | Oct 16, 2026 |
| License | Not available | Not available |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2024-06-30 | 2026-06-30 |
| Capabilities | ||
| Inputs | Text | Text |
| Outputs | Text | Text |
| Provider endpoint accepts tool parameters | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Vision | No | No |
| Image Generation | No | No |
| Video Generation | No | No |
| API pricing | ||
| Input (per 1M tokens) | $0.018 | $0.30 |
| Output (per 1M tokens) | $0.09 | $1.00 |
| Blended 3:1 input/output | $0.036 | $0.475 |
| API performance | ||
| p95 latency | Not measured | Not measured |
| Output throughput | Not measured | Not measured |
| Writingmate shows API performance only when both models have enough observations from the same measurement window, prompt profile, and provider. Third-party latency values are not copied into this table. | ||
Data sources
- Writingmate model catalog (pricing, limits, and availability)
Catalog data last updated Oct 16, 2026.
Why Pay for Multiple Subscriptions?
Comparing gpt-oss-20b from OpenAI with Beam 1.0 501B A23B from Reflection? Instead of managing separate API keys and subscriptions, get both with Writingmate.
| Plan | Price | gpt-oss-20b | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | AI Images | AI Video |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Writingmate Pro Most popular | $20/mo | Included | Included | Nano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & more | VEO 3.1, Kling 3.0 |
Writingmate Ultimate Power users | $60/mo | Included | Included | Nano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & more | VEO 3.1, Kling 3.0 |
gpt-oss-20b vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B FAQ
Which is better, gpt-oss-20b or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?
There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader. gpt-oss-20b is about 13.2× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($0.036 vs $0.475 per 1M tokens). Beam 1.0 501B A23B has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 131,072 tokens).
Which model is cheaper to use through an API?
gpt-oss-20b is about 13.2× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($0.036 vs $0.475 per 1M tokens).
Which model supports more context?
Beam 1.0 501B A23B has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 131,072 tokens).
Can I switch between gpt-oss-20b and Beam 1.0 501B A23B?
Yes. Use the model selector on this page to open any current Writingmate model comparison. You can also run the same prompt with both models in Writingmate.
Related comparisons
More gpt-oss-20b comparisons
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
DeepSeek
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is the October 17, 2026 snapshot of DeepSeek V4.1 Flash, served by DeepSeek under the deepseek-flash API model name.
Glimpse
Elorian
Glimpse is a multimodal visual reasoning model from Elorian, built for visual understanding and complex visual reasoning in the physical world.
Mercury 3
Inception
Mercury 3 is a diffusion-based language model from Inception, and the lab's most capable model to date.
Moondream 3 Preview
Moondream
Moondream 3 Preview is a vision-language model from Moondream with 9B total parameters and 2B active (mixture-of-experts).
Moondream 3.1
Moondream
Moondream 3.1 is a vision-language model from Moondream, the successor to Moondream 3 Preview, with 9B total parameters and 2B active (mixture-of-experts).
Muse Spark Open
Meta
Muse Spark Open is a coding-optimized open-weight model.
More Beam 1.0 501B A23B comparisons
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
DeepSeek
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is the October 17, 2026 snapshot of DeepSeek V4.1 Flash, served by DeepSeek under the deepseek-flash API model name.
Glimpse
Elorian
Glimpse is a multimodal visual reasoning model from Elorian, built for visual understanding and complex visual reasoning in the physical world.
Mercury 3
Inception
Mercury 3 is a diffusion-based language model from Inception, and the lab's most capable model to date.
Moondream 3 Preview
Moondream
Moondream 3 Preview is a vision-language model from Moondream with 9B total parameters and 2B active (mixture-of-experts).
Moondream 3.1
Moondream
Moondream 3.1 is a vision-language model from Moondream, the successor to Moondream 3 Preview, with 9B total parameters and 2B active (mixture-of-experts).
Muse Spark Open
Meta
Muse Spark Open is a coding-optimized open-weight model.