GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini vs Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B leads GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.4 to 20.4, and GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs 1.4x less per output token ($2.00 vs $2.70 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini 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-Mini has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($2.00 vs $2.70 per million) and a larger context window (400K against 262K tokens).
- Shared results
- 7
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini only
- 15
- Qwen3.6 27B only
- 17
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 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
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B leads, 21.4 against 20.4.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a AA Agentic Index result, 18.5.
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 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini $0.0013, Qwen3.6 27B $0.0018 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has the number, $1.30.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 31.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini 62.9% against Qwen3.6 27B 94.2%, 31.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini $2.00 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini 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.
| Category | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Bars | Qwen3.6 27B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 1 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 6 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1244 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 53.7 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.0% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 11.9% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 42.8% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 33.3% | 34.8% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| 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 30 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 20.4 | 21.4 | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 146.2 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 18.5 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 62.9% | 94.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 81.3% | 84.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 18.5% | 23.1% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 85.9% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 7.0% | 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 index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | 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 |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 91.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 35.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 53.2% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 62.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1111 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1078 | 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 | 1097 | 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 | 1093 | 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 | 1105 | Not measured | Only 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
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 45.6% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| IFBench | 67.9% | 67.6% | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 66.7% | 77.3% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| DTBench | Not measured | 78.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 34.5% | 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
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Qwen3.6 27B | 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 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | November 13, 2025 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 400K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $0.45 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.00 | $2.70 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 36.8 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $1.30 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini 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-Mini has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($2.00 vs $2.70 per million) and a larger context window (400K against 262K tokens).
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini or Qwen3.6 27B?
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $2.00 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-Mini or Qwen3.6 27B?
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini, with 400K tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?
7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini'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.