GPT-5.1-Codex-Max vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs 25.0x less per output token than GPT-5.1-Codex-Max ($0.40 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Max for a larger context window (400K against 33K tokens).
- Shared results
- 1
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max only
- 5
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct only
- 52
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has a AA Intelligence Index result, 7.7.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max takes 400K tokens against 33K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max $0.0063, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.0006 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 35.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- METR time horizons: GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 70.8% against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 35.8%, 35.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max $10.00 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.40 per million output tokens, 25.0x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max takes 400K tokens, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 33K.
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.
| Category | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Bars | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 0 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 83.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 22.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 27.6% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 4.5% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 16.0% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| ALE-Bench | 1228.3 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1292 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1292 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 7.7 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 129.0 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 34.5% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| METR time horizons | 70.8% | 35.8% | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max |
| BALROG | Not measured | 16.2% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| TheAgentCompany | Not measured | 5.7% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 49.1% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 3.6% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 49.1% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| BIG-Bench Hard | Not measured | 79.8% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1271 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1245 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1279 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 14.0 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 14.0% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 8.1% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| ProofBench | 9.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured |
| MATH level 5 | Not measured | 63.2% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1283 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1290 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 72.0% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| MMLU | Not measured | 85.3% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| AI2 Reasoning Challenge | Not measured | 94.5% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1275 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1258 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1288 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1253 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 36.9% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 62.9% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 13.4% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| HellaSwag | Not measured | 84.8% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| WinoGrande | Not measured | 82.3% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| PIQA | Not measured | 82.6% | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1269 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1254 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1221 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1283 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1252 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1273 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1234 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1180 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1188 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1280 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1255 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1264 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1272 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1281 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1247 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1211 | Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 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.
| Specification | OpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | December 4, 2025 | September 19, 2024 |
| Context window | 400K | 33K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.25 | $0.36 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $0.40 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex-Max better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Max for a larger context window (400K against 33K tokens).
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs $0.36 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max, with 400K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex-Max vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct comparison based on?
1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.1-Codex-Max's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.