Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max vs Qwen3.6 27B

Qwen3.6 27B costs 3.7x less per output token than GPT-5.1-Codex-Max ($2.70 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.1-Codex-MaxOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
1
Qwen3.6 27BQwen
Coding
36.8
Overall
45.3
Output $/M
$2.70
0
vs boards won of 1 shared

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-5.1-Codex-Max has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Max for a larger context window (400K against 262K tokens) and work measured by Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
1
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max only
5
Qwen3.6 27B only
23
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.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 10.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 22.2% against Qwen3.6 27B 11.9%, 10.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max $10.00 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 3.7x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max takes 400K tokens, Qwen3.6 27B 262K.

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-MaxBarsQwen3.6 27BTies
Coding10
All shared boards10
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured53.7Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)83.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured70.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)22.2%11.9%GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
SciCodeNot measured42.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Terminal-Bench60.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
ALE-Bench1228.3Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured21.4Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured146.2Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
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 Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured18.5Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured94.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
METR time horizons70.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured85.9%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured7.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured91.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured35.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
ProofBench9.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured62.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Max and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured45.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
IFBenchNot measured67.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured77.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
DTBenchNot measured78.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LMCANot measured34.5%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 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 Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27BLeader
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
Qwen3.6 27B$0.0018Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max$0.092Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.031Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max$0.350Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.117Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 27B 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 Qwen3.6 27B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex-MaxQwen3.6 27B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 4, 2025April 27, 2026
Context window400K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.45
Output $/Mtok$10.00$2.70
Coding indexNot benchmarked36.8
Independent measurements behind it12
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.30
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1-Codex-Max better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-5.1-Codex-Max has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Max for a larger context window (400K against 262K tokens) and work measured by Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Qwen3.6 27B?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 and $2.70. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 27B only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Qwen3.6 27B?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max, with 400K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex-Max vs Qwen3.6 27B 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 Qwen3.6 27B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next