Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 Air vs GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini leads GLM 4.5 Air on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.4 to 11.1, and GLM 4.5 Air costs 1.8x less per output token ($1.10 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 18 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 4.5 Air Replace GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
GLM 4.5 AirZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.10
7
GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.00
11
vs boards won of 18 shared

GLM 4.5 Air or GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GLM 4.5 Air for output tokens 1.8x cheaper ($1.10 vs $2.00 per million) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Model AGLM 4.5 AirZ.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniOpenAINot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
18
GLM 4.5 Air only
30
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini only
4
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GLM 4.5 Air not benchmarked, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 25.2 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
IFBench: GLM 4.5 Air 37.6% against GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini 67.9%, 30.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 Air $1.10 against GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini $2.00 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 Air takes 131K tokens, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini 400K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGLM 4.5 AirBarsGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTies
Coding02
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Math02
Knowledge01
Web design70
General02
All shared boards711
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1244Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)68.4%83.6%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)20.5%33.3%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Terminal-BenchNot measured61.6%Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
GSO-Bench2.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: coding1397Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1401Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1253Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.120.4GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom46.5%62.9%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)73.3%81.3%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.0%18.5%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
LMArena Text: hard prompts1379Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: expert1370Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1388Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark43.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
AA Math Index80.791.7GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)80.7%91.7%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
LMArena Text: math1396Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1396Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)81.5%82.0%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
LMArena Text: science1407Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1402Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1382Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1371Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
Design Arena: websites11461111GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: UI components11201078GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: game dev10941092GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: data viz11861097GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: 3D1122988GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: all code categories11371093GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: SVG1071978GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1105Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
IFBench37.6%67.9%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)46.7%66.7%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
LMArena Text1384Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1354Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1343Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: English1397Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: non-English1366Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1426Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: German1377Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1348Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Korean1308Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: French1400Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1385Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Russian1373Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Polish1368Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1371Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1366Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1354Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1339Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.0008Fits in one request
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini$0.0013Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.013Fits in one request
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini$0.018Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.051Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini$0.070Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5 AirOpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025November 13, 2025
Context window131K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.20$0.25
Output $/Mtok$1.10$2.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 Air better than GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 Air for output tokens 1.8x cheaper ($1.10 vs $2.00 per million) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 Air or GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini?

GLM 4.5 Air costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs $0.25 and $2.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 Air or GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini, with 400K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 Air vs GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini comparison based on?

18 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.5 Air's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next