GPT-5.1-Codex-Max vs Solar Pro 4
Solar Pro 4 costs 16.7x less per output token than GPT-5.1-Codex-Max ($0.60 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Solar Pro 4: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
- Shared results
- 1
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max only
- 5
- Solar Pro 4 only
- 44
- 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 Solar Pro 4 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 28.2.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Solar Pro 4 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1176.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Solar Pro 4
Solar Pro 4 takes 524K tokens against 400K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Solar Pro 4
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max $0.0063, Solar Pro 4 $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max not benchmarked, Solar Pro 4 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Coding, 35.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- ALE-Bench: GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 1228.3 against Solar Pro 4 179.3, 35.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max $10.00 against Solar Pro 4 $0.60 per million output tokens, 16.7x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max takes 400K tokens, Solar Pro 4 524K.
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 | Solar Pro 4 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1371 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 52.7 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| 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 |
| SciCode | Not measured | 48.0% | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured |
| ALE-Bench | 1228.3 | 179.3 | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1438 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1431 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1363 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1371 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 28.2 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1105 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| METR time horizons | 70.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 89.1% | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 29.8% | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1400 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1428 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1427 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 9.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1421 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1427 | Only Solar Pro 4 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
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1404 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1374 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1383 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1381 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1176 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1150 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1170 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1177 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1178 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1182 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index18 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 70.7% | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1388 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1375 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1317 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1414 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1363 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1422 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1358 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1320 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1383 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1400 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1409 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1357 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1304 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1385 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1382 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1344 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1332 | Only Solar Pro 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | Solar Pro 4 | 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
Solar Pro 4 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Solar Pro 4 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Solar Pro 4 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 | Upstage Solar Pro 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Upstage |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | December 4, 2025 | August 10, 2026 |
| Context window | 400K | 524K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.25 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $0.60 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex-Max better than Solar Pro 4 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Solar Pro 4?
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Solar Pro 4 costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max or Solar Pro 4?
Solar Pro 4, with 524K tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex-Max vs Solar Pro 4 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 Solar Pro 4's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.