Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini vs o4 Mini

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini leads o4 Mini on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.4 to 16.7, and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs 2.2x less per output token ($2.00 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 17 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.00
14
o4 MiniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
43.0
Output $/M
$4.40
3
vs boards won of 17 shared

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or o4 Mini: which to pick

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

Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini for output tokens 2.2x cheaper ($2.00 vs $4.40 per million) and a larger context window (400K against 200K tokens).

Shared results
17
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini only
5
o4 Mini only
81
Like-for-like categories
8 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-Mini not benchmarked, o4 Mini not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 14.0 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run): GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini 33.3% against o4 Mini 15.2%, 18.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini $2.00 against o4 Mini $4.40 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini takes 400K tokens, o4 Mini 200K.

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-MiniBarso4 MiniTies
Coding11
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
Math20
Knowledge01
Web design60
General11
All shared boards143
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured72.0%Only o4 Mini measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured64.6%Only o4 Mini measured
SWE-bench MultimodalNot measured33.9%Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena WebDev1244Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured82.2%Only o4 Mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)83.6%85.9%o4 Mini
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)33.3%15.2%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Terminal-Bench61.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
GSO-BenchNot measured3.6%Only o4 Mini measured
WeirdMLNot measured52.6%Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1368Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1367Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1253Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
SciCodeNot measured10.8%Only o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
AA Intelligence Index20.416.7GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured145.5Only o4 Mini measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom62.9%55.6%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
METR time horizonsNot measured63.9%Only o4 Mini measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured53.2%Only o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured74.5%Only o4 Mini measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured79.7%Only o4 Mini measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)81.3%78.4%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)18.5%16.5%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured79.6%Only o4 Mini measured
ARC-AGINot measured58.7%Only o4 Mini measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured6.1%Only o4 Mini measured
SimpleBenchNot measured38.7%Only o4 Mini measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured22.0%Only o4 Mini measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured5.0%Only o4 Mini measured
VPCTNot measured57.5%Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1351Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1343Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1366Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1197Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1234Only o4 Mini measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured67.6%Only o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
AIMENot measured83.7%Only o4 Mini measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured94.2%Only o4 Mini measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured93.4%Only o4 Mini measured
AA Math Index91.790.7GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)91.7%90.7%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured81.7%Only o4 Mini measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured36.1%Only o4 Mini measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured4.9%Only o4 Mini measured
MATH level 5Not measured97.8%Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1389Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1379Only o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
MMLU ProNot measured80.6%Only o4 Mini measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured79.2%Only o4 Mini measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured59.0%Only o4 Mini measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.8%Only o4 Mini measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured64.8%Only o4 Mini measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured96.0%Only o4 Mini measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured33.8%Only o4 Mini measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)82.0%83.2%o4 Mini
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured19.6%Only o4 Mini measured
GeoBenchNot measured64.0%Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1354Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1361Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1350Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1325Only o4 Mini measured
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured28.1%Only o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
Design Arena: websites1111985GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Design Arena: UI components1081983GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Design Arena: game dev10921003GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Design Arena: data viz1097990GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Design Arena: 3D988854GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Design Arena: all code categories1094976GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Design Arena: SVG978Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1105Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured41.1%Only o4 Mini measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured69.1%Only o4 Mini measured
IFBench67.9%68.7%o4 Mini
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)66.7%61.0%GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
DTBenchNot measured77.6%Only o4 Mini measured
LMCANot measured26.5%Only o4 Mini measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured77.8%Only o4 Mini measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured75.0%Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena TextNot measured1353Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1320Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1294Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1194Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1367Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1337Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1354Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1336Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1308Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1312Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1364Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1346Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1334Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1358Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1350Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1315Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1316Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1308Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1200Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1218Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1197Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1199Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1204Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1218Only o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1166Only o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 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-Mini and o4 Mini
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-Minio4 MiniLeader
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$0.0013Fits in one request
o4 Mini$0.0033Fits in one request

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini$0.018Fits in one request
o4 Mini$0.068Fits in one request

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini$0.070Fits in one request
o4 Mini$0.264Exceeds the context window

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.

Specifications of GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and o4 Mini
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniOpenAI o4 Mini
MakerOpenAIOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025April 16, 2025
Context window400K200K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$1.10
Output $/Mtok$2.00$4.40
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini better than o4 Mini for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini for output tokens 2.2x cheaper ($2.00 vs $4.40 per million) and a larger context window (400K against 200K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or o4 Mini?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $2.00 per million output tokens; o4 Mini costs $1.10 and $4.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or o4 Mini?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini, with 400K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini vs o4 Mini comparison based on?

17 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 o4 Mini's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next