Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max vs Mercury 2

Updated October 21, 2026. 1 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-5.1-Codex-MaxOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
1
Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
10.8
Output $/M
$0.75
0
vs boards won of 1 shared

Decision reading

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

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max has the edge where the context window is larger, 400K against 128K tokens.

Shared results
1
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max only
5
Mercury 2 only
41
Like-for-like categories
1 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max not benchmarked, Mercury 2 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 14.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 1228.3 against Mercury 2 785.6, 14.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max $10.00 against Mercury 2 $0.75 per million output tokens, 13.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max takes 400K tokens, Mercury 2 128K.

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
CategoryGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxBarsMercury 2Ties
Coding10
All shared boards10
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1171Only Mercury 2 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured31.1Only Mercury 2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)83.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)22.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
SciCodeNot measured37.7%Only Mercury 2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured26.5%Only Mercury 2 measured
Terminal-Bench60.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
WeirdMLNot measured43.2%Only Mercury 2 measured
ALE-Bench1228.3785.6GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1390Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1385Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1160Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1199Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured10.8Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.6Only Mercury 2 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured70.8%Only Mercury 2 measured
METR time horizons70.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured77.0%Only Mercury 2 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured17.1%Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1362Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1358Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1374Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
ProofBench9.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1343Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1363Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1349Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1036Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured998Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured985Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1009Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured983Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1022Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured998Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured990Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
IFBenchNot measured69.8%Only Mercury 2 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured43.7%Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1354Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1328Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1286Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1378Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1330Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1414Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1304Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1357Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1329Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1300Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1314Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxMercury 2Leader
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

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max$0.0063Fits in one request
Mercury 2$0.0006Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max$0.092Fits in one request
Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max$0.350Fits in one request
Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window

Mercury 2 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 GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Mercury 2
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex-MaxInception Mercury 2
MakerOpenAIInception
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedDecember 4, 2025March 4, 2026
Context window400K128K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.25
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.75
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1-Codex-Max better than Mercury 2 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GPT-5.1-Codex-Max has the edge where the context window is larger, 400K against 128K tokens.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Mercury 2?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Mercury 2 costs $0.25 and $0.75. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Mercury 2?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max, with 400K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex-Max vs Mercury 2 comparison based on?

1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5.1-Codex-Max's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Mercury 2's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next