Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex vs Mercury 3

Mercury 3 costs 28.6x less per output token than GPT-5.1-Codex ($0.35 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.1-CodexOpenAI
Coding
15.3
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
1
Mercury 3Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.35
4
vs boards won of 5 shared

GPT-5.1-Codex or Mercury 3: which to pick

Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a coding score, 15.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mercury 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Mercury 3 for output tokens 28.6x cheaper ($0.35 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 400K tokens).

Shared results
5
GPT-5.1-Codex only
21
Mercury 3 only
0
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.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.1-Codex 15.3 from 2 benchmarks, Mercury 3 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 7.5 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: game dev: GPT-5.1-Codex 1138 against Mercury 3 1227, 11.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex $10.00 against Mercury 3 $0.35 per million output tokens, 28.6x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex takes 400K tokens, Mercury 3 1M.

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-CodexBarsMercury 3Ties
Web design14
All shared boards14
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
SWE-bench Verified66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev1337Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)13.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)84.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)34.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench57.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1244.9Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1346Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
AA Intelligence Index23.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1018Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1086Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1191Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
τ²-Bench Telecom83.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)25.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
AA Math Index95.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)95.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex 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
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
Design Arena: websites11621244Mercury 3
Design Arena: UI components12371270Mercury 3
Design Arena: game dev11381227Mercury 3
Design Arena: data viz12131207GPT-5.1-Codex
Design Arena: all code categories11521240Mercury 3
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
IFBench70.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex 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
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mercury 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMercury 3Leader
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$0.0063Fits in one request
Mercury 3$0.0003Fits in one request

Mercury 3 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.092Fits in one request
Mercury 3$0.0060Fits in one request

Mercury 3 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.350Fits in one request
Mercury 3$0.024Fits in one request

Mercury 3 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 and Mercury 3
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-CodexInception Mercury 3
MakerOpenAIInception
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025October 16, 2026
Context window400K1M
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.10
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.35
Coding index15.3Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved task$0.892Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Mercury 3 for coding?

Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a coding score, 15.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mercury 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mercury 3 for output tokens 28.6x cheaper ($0.35 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 400K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex or Mercury 3?

GPT-5.1-Codex costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Mercury 3 costs $0.10 and $0.35. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.1-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex or Mercury 3?

Mercury 3, with 1M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex vs Mercury 3 comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5.1-Codex's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Mercury 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next