GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini vs Moondream 3.1
Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 20.4
- Output $/M
- $2.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $2.50
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini has the edge where output tokens cost 1.3x less, and where the context window is larger, 400K against 32K tokens.
- Shared results
- 0
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini only
- 22
- Moondream 3.1 only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 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.
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 GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini has a AA Intelligence Index result, 20.4.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini has a Design Arena: websites result, 1111.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini takes 400K tokens against 32K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini $0.0013, Moondream 3.1 $0.0015 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini not benchmarked, Moondream 3.1 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- No category has a result for both models.
- Widest single gap
- No benchmark has a result for both models.
- Output price
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini $2.00 against Moondream 3.1 $2.50 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini takes 400K tokens, Moondream 3.1 32K.
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.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1244 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 33.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 61.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1253 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 20.4 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 62.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 81.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 18.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 91.7 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 91.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1111 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1081 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1092 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1096 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 988 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1094 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 978 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1104 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 67.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 66.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Moondream 3.1 | 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
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini 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-Mini | Moondream 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Moondream |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | November 13, 2025 | October 15, 2026 |
| Context window | 400K | 32K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $0.30 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.00 | $2.50 |
| 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-Mini better than Moondream 3.1 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini has the edge where output tokens cost 1.3x less, and where the context window is larger, 400K against 32K tokens.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or Moondream 3.1?
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $2.00 per million output tokens; Moondream 3.1 costs $0.30 and $2.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or Moondream 3.1?
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini, with 400K tokens against 32K.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini vs Moondream 3.1 comparison based on?
0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Moondream 3.1's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.