LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Updated October 21, 2026. 17 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
50.5
Overall
23.7
Output $/M
$10.00
2
Qwen3.6 PlusQwen
Coding
37.4
Overall
27.0
Output $/M
$1.95
15
vs boards won of 17 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5.1-Codex for coding: it scores 50.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 37.4 for Qwen3.6 Plus.

Pick Qwen3.6 Plus when output tokens cost 5.1x less, or when the context window is larger, 1M against 400K tokens.

Shared results
17
GPT-5.1-Codex only
9
Qwen3.6 Plus only
66
Like-for-like categories
6 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 50.5 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.6 Plus 37.4 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Agentic work, 14.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: HTML: GPT-5.1-Codex 1346 against Qwen3.6 Plus 1463, 19.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex $10.00 against Qwen3.6 Plus $1.95 per million output tokens, 5.1x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex takes 400K tokens, Qwen3.6 Plus 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-CodexBarsQwen3.6 PlusTies
Coding15
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Web design14
General02
All shared boards215
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index15
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
SWE-bench Verified66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev13371461Qwen3.6 Plus
AA Coding IndexNot measured54.5Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.5%86.0%Qwen3.6 Plus
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured73.4%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)13.1%25.6%Qwen3.6 Plus
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured11.1%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)84.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)34.8%43.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
Terminal-Bench57.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1244.9670.1GPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1467Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1462Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1454Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13461463Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1472Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
AA Intelligence Index23.727.0Qwen3.6 Plus
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured147.3Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
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
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured40.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured7.7%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured14.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured32.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
τ²-Bench Telecom83.0%97.7%Qwen3.6 Plus
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$5,115Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured87.4%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured84.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%88.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)25.7%27.8%Qwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured88.4%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured14.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured12.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1448Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1454Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1455Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
AIMENot measured94.6%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
AA Math Index95.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)95.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured93.3%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured38.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1449Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1448Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
MMLU ProNot measured87.7%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured51.5%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured61.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.7%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured36.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured44.1%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1439Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1442Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1437Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1430Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
Design Arena: websites11621243Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: UI components12371233GPT-5.1-Codex
Design Arena: game dev11381211Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: data viz12131228Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1202Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: all code categories11531236Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1160Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1115Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured44.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured77.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured51.5%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
IFBench70.0%75.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%78.3%Qwen3.6 Plus
DTBenchNot measured81.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMCANot measured33.1%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
CL-benchNot measured20.3%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena TextNot measured1436Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1424Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1404Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1445Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1424Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1477Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1451Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1390Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1379Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1455Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1432Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1434Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1433Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1438Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1439Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1418Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1402Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 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 Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 PlusLeader
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
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.0013Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Plus costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.092Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.022Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Plus costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.350Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.085Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Plus 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 Qwen3.6 Plus
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-CodexQwen3.6 Plus
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025April 2, 2026
Context window400K1M
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.325
Output $/Mtok$10.00$1.95
Coding index50.537.4
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved task$0.892$1.19
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Qwen3.6 Plus for coding?

Pick GPT-5.1-Codex for coding: it scores 50.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 37.4 for Qwen3.6 Plus. Pick Qwen3.6 Plus when output tokens cost 5.1x less, or when the context window is larger, 1M against 400K tokens.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen3.6 Plus?

GPT-5.1-Codex costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus costs $0.325 and $1.95. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.1-Codex costs $0.892 and Qwen3.6 Plus $1.19.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus, with 1M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex vs Qwen3.6 Plus comparison based on?

17 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 Qwen3.6 Plus's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next