Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex vs Mistral Small 4

Updated October 21, 2026. 9 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-5.1-CodexOpenAI
Coding
15.3
Overall
23.7
Output $/M
$10.00
9
Mistral Small 4Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
11.3
Output $/M
$0.60
0
vs boards won of 9 shared

Decision reading

Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a coding score, 15.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Small 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Mistral Small 4 has the edge where output tokens cost 16.7x less.

Shared results
9
GPT-5.1-Codex only
17
Mistral Small 4 only
5
Like-for-like categories
5 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.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.1-Codex 15.3 from 2 benchmarks, Mistral Small 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 41.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GPT-5.1-Codex 83.0% against Mistral Small 4 41.2%, 41.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex $10.00 against Mistral Small 4 $0.60 per million output tokens, 16.7x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex takes 400K tokens, Mistral Small 4 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-5.1-CodexBarsMistral Small 4Ties
Coding30
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General20
All shared boards90
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
SWE-bench Verified66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev1337Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured26.6Only Mistral Small 4 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)13.1%0.0%GPT-5.1-Codex
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)84.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
SciCodeNot measured38.8%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)34.8%17.4%GPT-5.1-Codex
Terminal-Bench57.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1244.9497.6GPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena WebDev: HTML1346Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
AA Intelligence Index23.711.3GPT-5.1-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured0.8Only Mistral Small 4 measured
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%41.2%GPT-5.1-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%76.9%GPT-5.1-Codex
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)25.7%9.9%GPT-5.1-Codex
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
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
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 Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
Design Arena: websites1162Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: UI components1237Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: game dev1138Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: data viz1213Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: all code categories1152Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
IFBench70.0%48.2%GPT-5.1-Codex
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%49.7%GPT-5.1-Codex
DTBenchNot measured70.9%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
LMCANot measured20.6%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 42 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 Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4Leader
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
Mistral Small 4$0.0004Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.092Fits in one request
Mistral Small 4$0.0093Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.350Fits in one request
Mistral Small 4$0.036Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 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 Mistral Small 4
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-CodexMistral Small 4
MakerOpenAIMistral AI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025March 16, 2026
Context window400K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.15
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.60
Coding index15.3Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved task$0.892Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Mistral Small 4 for coding?

Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a coding score, 15.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Small 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Mistral Small 4 has the edge where output tokens cost 16.7x less.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex or Mistral Small 4?

GPT-5.1-Codex costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 4 costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.1-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex or Mistral Small 4?

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

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex vs Mistral Small 4 comparison based on?

9 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 Mistral Small 4's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next