Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex vs Solar Mini 4

Solar Mini 4 leads GPT-5.1-Codex on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.1 to 23.7, and Solar Mini 4 costs 50.0x less per output token ($0.20 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 6 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.1-CodexOpenAI
Coding
15.3
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
3
Solar Mini 4Upstage
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
3
vs boards won of 6 shared

GPT-5.1-Codex or Solar Mini 4: which to pick

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

Pick Solar Mini 4 for output tokens 50.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (524K against 400K tokens).

Shared results
6
GPT-5.1-Codex only
20
Solar Mini 4 only
1
Like-for-like categories
4 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, Solar Mini 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 14.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): GPT-5.1-Codex 69.3% against Solar Mini 4 83.3%, 14.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex $10.00 against Solar Mini 4 $0.20 per million output tokens, 50.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex takes 400K tokens, Solar Mini 4 524K.

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-CodexBarsSolar Mini 4Ties
Intelligence01
Reasoning01
Web design30
General01
All shared boards33
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 4Leader
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
SciCodeNot measured47.6%Only Solar Mini 4 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 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 4Leader
AA Intelligence Index23.724.1Solar Mini 4
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 Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 4Leader
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
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 4Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)25.7%25.8%Solar Mini 4
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 Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 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 Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 4Leader
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 index30
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 4Leader
Design Arena: websites11621159GPT-5.1-Codex
Design Arena: UI components1237Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: game dev11381109GPT-5.1-Codex
Design Arena: data viz1213Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: all code categories11521150GPT-5.1-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 4Leader
IFBench70.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%83.3%Solar Mini 4
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 Solar Mini 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexSolar Mini 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
Solar Mini 4$0.0001Fits in one request

Solar Mini 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.092Fits in one request
Solar Mini 4$0.0031Fits in one request

Solar Mini 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.350Fits in one request
Solar Mini 4$0.012Fits in one request

Solar Mini 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 Solar Mini 4
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-CodexUpstage Solar Mini 4
MakerOpenAIUpstage
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025September 23, 2026
Context window400K524K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.05
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.20
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 Solar Mini 4 for coding?

Only GPT-5.1-Codex has a coding score, 15.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Solar Mini 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Solar Mini 4 for output tokens 50.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (524K against 400K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex or Solar Mini 4?

GPT-5.1-Codex costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Solar Mini 4 costs $0.05 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 Solar Mini 4?

Solar Mini 4, with 524K tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex vs Solar Mini 4 comparison based on?

6 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 Solar Mini 4's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next