Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.3-Codex vs Extract

Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-5.3-CodexOpenAI
Coding
60.0
Overall
32.5
Output $/M
$14.00
S ExtractScaledown
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
No data
vs 400K vs 1M context window. Extract fits 2.5x more.

Decision reading

Only GPT-5.3-Codex has a coding score, 60.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Extract has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Extract has the edge where the context window is larger, 1M against 400K tokens.

Shared results
0
GPT-5.3-Codex only
34
Extract only
0
Like-for-like categories
0 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-5.3-Codex 60.0 from 3 benchmarks, Extract not benchmarked.
Widest category
No category has a result for both models.
Widest single gap
No benchmark has a result for both models.
Output price
GPT-5.3-Codex $14.00 against Extract Free per million output tokens.
Context window
GPT-5.3-Codex takes 400K tokens, Extract 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.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index12 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
LMArena WebDev1407Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)87.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)78.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
IOI (Vals AI)53.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)53.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench78.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
WeirdML79.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1655.2Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: React1395Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1422Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1443Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
AA Intelligence Index32.5Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Epoch Capabilities Index157.1Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1032Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps983Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1053Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1084Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1124Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
τ²-Bench Telecom86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
METR time horizons74.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,940Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
Neither model has a result on 13 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
Neither model has a result on 17 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
Design Arena: websites1163Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: UI components1137Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: game dev1161Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: data viz1163Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: 3D1008Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: all code categories1145Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: SVG1129Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1151Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
IFBench75.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)83.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-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-5.3-Codex and Extract
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexExtractLeader
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-5.3-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request
Extract$0.0000Fits in one request

Extract costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.3-Codex$0.130Fits in one request
Extract$0.0020Fits in one request

Extract costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.3-Codex$0.490Fits in one request
Extract$0.0080Fits in one request

Extract 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-5.3-Codex and Extract
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.3-CodexScaleDown Extract
MakerOpenAIScaledown
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedFebruary 24, 2026October 13, 2026
Context window400K1M
Input $/Mtok$1.75$0.04
Output $/Mtok$14.00Free
Coding index60.0Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.59Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.3-Codex better than Extract for coding?

Only GPT-5.3-Codex has a coding score, 60.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Extract has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Extract has the edge where the context window is larger, 1M against 400K tokens.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.3-Codex or Extract?

GPT-5.3-Codex costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Extract costs $0.04 and Free. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.3-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.3-Codex or Extract?

Extract, with 1M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.3-Codex vs Extract comparison based on?

0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5.3-Codex's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Extract's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next