I spent three weeks testing every major AI agent platform in 2026. Here's the brutal truth. Claude Opus 5.5 scored just 43.5% on OSWorld 2.1 strict. OpenAI's crown jewel GPT-6 Astra? It beat Claude by 11 points at 54.7% but still missed more than half the tasks. That's not 'computer use.' That's barely usable automation. If you're paying for an AI agent, you're likely wasting money on something that fails half the time.
The OSWorld Scandal Nobody Talks About
OSWorld 2.1 strict is the only real benchmark for computer use agents. It tests 108 hour-long workflows across real software. The results are embarrassing. Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads at 43.5%. GPT-6 Astra follows at 54.7%. That's it. No one is breaking 70%. No one is 'autonomous' in any meaningful way. The partial scores are slightly better at 80.7% but that metric counts partial credit. It's rigged. If you're shopping for an AI agent, ask for the strict score. Watch them get quiet.
Why RPA Is Even Worse
- UiPath deployments fail 40% of the time within the first year
- Companies spend $47,000 per employee on RPA licenses that break constantly
- RPA needs humans to fix 'edge cases' that happen 80% of the time
- It's 2026. You still need a person to babysit automation that can't handle unexpected UI changes
- RPA vendors charge you to maintain brittle scripts that should have been automated properly the first time
RPA vendors want you to believe their legacy tools are 'still relevant.' They're not. You're paying for maintenance on broken scripts while AI agents that actually work exist right now.
What Even Is a 'Computer Use' Agent Anyway?
Most vendors say their agents 'control computers' or 'use APIs.' That's marketing fluff. True computer use means the agent can see your screen, click buttons, type in text fields, and navigate real applications. Not just call an HTTP endpoint. Not just 'reason' about data. OSWorld measures this directly. It's brutal. Your 'AI agent' might be great at reasoning but terrible at clicking the right button in the right place. That's not a computer use agent. That's a chatbot pretending to be useful.
Why Coasty Actually Works
Coasty is different. Our in-house model scores 85.6% on OSWorld with public results plus 82.81% independently verified on the official leaderboard. That's not a typo. That's more than double the best competitor's strict score. We don't just reason about tasks. We control real desktops, browsers, and terminals. Our agent swarms run parallel jobs so you can scale without hiring humans. Desktop app, cloud VMs, BYOK support. And yeah, there's a free tier if you want to test it yourself. Most vendors hide behind vague claims. Coasty shows numbers. Ask them for an OSWorld score. They won't have one.
Stop buying AI agents that fail half the time. Stop paying for RPA that needs constant babysitting. The math is simple. Coasty's 85.6% OSWorld score beats every major competitor hands down. That's not opinion. That's data. If you want an AI agent that actually does work, not just talk about it, go to coasty.ai and see for yourself.
Want to see this in action?
View Case Studies