GPT-5.1-Codex vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 50.0x less per output token than GPT-5.1-Codex ($0.20 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- 15.3
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $10.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.20
GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: which to pick
Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a coding score, 15.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen2.5 7B Instruct for output tokens 50.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $10.00 per million).
No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5.1-Codex has results on SWE-bench Verified, LMArena WebDev and LiveCodeBench (Vals AI); Qwen2.5 7B Instruct on Epoch Capabilities Index, BALROG and GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run). 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a AA Intelligence Index result, 23.7.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a Design Arena: websites result, 1162.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5.1-Codex
GPT-5.1-Codex takes 400K tokens against 33K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPT-5.1-Codex $0.0063, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only GPT-5.1-Codex has the number, $0.892.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5.1-Codex 15.3 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 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 $10.00 against Qwen2.5 7B Instruct $0.20 per million output tokens, 50.0x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5.1-Codex takes 400K tokens, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 33K.
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 Index9 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 66.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1337 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 85.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 13.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 34.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 57.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| ALE-Bench | 1244.9 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1346 | Not measured | Only 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 index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 23.7 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 118.5 | Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | 1018 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | 1086 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1191 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 83.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| BALROG | Not measured | 7.8% | Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 86.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 25.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 35.5% | Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 95.7 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 95.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 2.5% | Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 86.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| MMLU | Not measured | 72.9% | Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 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 measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1162 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1237 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1138 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1213 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1152 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 70.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 69.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.1-Codex measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 47.7% | Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 6.4% | Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 42 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
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 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 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | November 13, 2025 | October 16, 2024 |
| Context window | 400K | 33K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.25 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $0.20 |
| Coding index | 15.3 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.892 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct for coding?
Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a coding score, 15.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen2.5 7B Instruct for output tokens 50.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $10.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
GPT-5.1-Codex costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs $0.10 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.1-Codex only.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
GPT-5.1-Codex, with 400K tokens against 33K.
Has any benchmark tested both GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5.1-Codex has results on SWE-bench Verified, LMArena WebDev and LiveCodeBench (Vals AI); Qwen2.5 7B Instruct on Epoch Capabilities Index, BALROG and GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.