Head-to-head showdown: Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) ($0.07 in / $0.29 out per 1M) vs GPT-5.6 Terra ($2.00 in / $12.00 out per 1M). Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) is 37.9× cheaper across standard token mixes, with 8.2K vs 1.1M context windows.
tencent/hy-mt2-30b-a3b · tencent
gpt-5.6-terra · openai
Benchmarks
Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter)
No verified third-party composite score published.
GPT-5.6 Terra
Third-party composite indices via OpenRouter's live catalog — source and verification date on each model page.
Cost by Volume
| Workload Scenario | Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) | GPT-5.6 Terra | Price Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1M input tokens (raw text) | $0.074 | $2.00 | −$1.926 |
| 1M output tokens (generation) | $0.295 | $12.00 | −$11.705 |
| 1M tokens · 70% input / 30% output mix | $0.1403 | $5.00 | −$4.86 |
| Standard chat turn (4K in / 800 out, 50% cached) | $0.000532 | $0.014 | −$0.0135 |
| Monthly scale (10K requests / day) | $159.60 | $4,200.00 | −$4,040.40 |
Negative difference = Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) is cheaper. Positive = GPT-5.6 Terra is cheaper.
Best For
Fit score = weighted composite blend for each use case; value = fit ÷ cost per 1,000 requests. Scoreboard: Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) 0 – 8 GPT-5.6 Terra.
| Use case | Fit — Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) | Fit — GPT-5.6 Terra | Cost / 1K — Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) | Cost / 1K — GPT-5.6 Terra | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Customer support chatbot | — | 56.1 | $0.3623 | $6.79 | GPT-5.6 Terra — only scored model |
| RAG / search-augmented answers | — | 58.7 | $0.7395 | $14.80 | GPT-5.6 Terra — only scored model |
| AI coding assistant | — | 68.0 | $1.478 | $35.04 | GPT-5.6 Terra — only scored model |
| Document summarization | — | 56.7 | $2.027 | $52.70 | GPT-5.6 Terra — only scored model |
| Agentic workflow | — | 56.8 | $3.403 | $51.20 | GPT-5.6 Terra — only scored model |
| Content generation | — | 56.7 | $0.4132 | $15.568 | GPT-5.6 Terra — only scored model |
| Data extraction & tagging | — | 63.4 | $0.2218 | $6.28 | GPT-5.6 Terra — only scored model |
| Translation | — | 57.3 | $1.993 | $74.65 | GPT-5.6 Terra — only scored model |
Costs use each use case's typical token mix and cacheable share. Fit weights are documented on the methodology page.
Scaling Curve
Total cost of a token volume at 70/30 input/output split (uncached). Log-log scale.
Verdict
Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) is cheaper on both input and output rates, so it costs less at every input/output mix. Price alone still isn't the whole decision: capability, latency and context limits (Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter): 8.2K, GPT-5.6 Terra: 1.1M) may justify the premium for your task.
FAQ
On input, Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) is cheaper ($0.074/M vs $2.00/M). On output, Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) is cheaper ($0.295/M vs $12.00/M). The same model is cheaper on both sides, so it wins at every mix.
A chat-style request (4,000 input + 800 output tokens, 50% cached) costs $0.000532 on Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) and $0.014 on GPT-5.6 Terra — Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) is 26.3× cheaper for that workload.
Hy-MT2-30B-A3B (OpenRouter) supports 8,192 tokens (8.2K max output); GPT-5.6 Terra supports 1,050,000 (128K max output). GPT-5.6 Terra fits 128.2× more context, which matters for long documents and agents.