Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs 4.0x less per output token than GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini ($0.50 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.00
P Ternary Bonsai 2 27BPrism-ml
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.50
vs $2.00 vs $0.50 per 1M output tokens. Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is 4.0x cheaper.

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B: 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 a larger context window (400K against 262K tokens).

No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini has results on LMArena WebDev, LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) and Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run); Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead.

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, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini $2.00 against Ternary Bonsai 2 27B $0.50 per million output tokens, 4.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini takes 400K tokens, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index5 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTernary Bonsai 2 27BLeader
LMArena WebDev1244Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)83.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)33.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Terminal-Bench61.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1253Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTernary Bonsai 2 27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index20.4Not measuredOnly 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 measured
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTernary Bonsai 2 27BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom62.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTernary Bonsai 2 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)81.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)18.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTernary Bonsai 2 27BLeader
AA Math Index91.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)91.7%Not measuredOnly 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 measured
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTernary Bonsai 2 27BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)82.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTernary Bonsai 2 27BLeader
Design Arena: websites1111Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Design Arena: UI components1078Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Design Arena: game dev1092Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Design Arena: data viz1097Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Design Arena: 3D988Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Design Arena: all code categories1093Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
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
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-Codex-MiniTernary Bonsai 2 27BLeader
IFBench67.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)66.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 44 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
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B$0.0003Fits in one request

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini$0.018Fits in one request
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B$0.0053Fits in one request

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini$0.070Fits in one request
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B$0.020Fits in one request

Ternary Bonsai 2 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-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniPrismML Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
MakerOpenAIPrism-ml
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025September 18, 2026
Context window400K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.075
Output $/Mtok$2.00$0.50
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 Ternary Bonsai 2 27B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini for a larger context window (400K against 262K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $2.00 per million output tokens; Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs $0.075 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

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

Has any benchmark tested both GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini has results on LMArena WebDev, LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) and Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run); Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next