GPT-5 Image vs Weaver (alpha)
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.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $10.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.75
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
GPT-5 Image has the edge where the context window is larger, 400K against 8K tokens.
- Shared results
- 0
- GPT-5 Image only
- 3
- Weaver (alpha) 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Image generation
Design Arena: images
No call
Only GPT-5 Image has a Design Arena: images result, 1191.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5 Image
GPT-5 Image takes 400K tokens against 8K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Weaver (alpha)
GPT-5 Image $0.015, Weaver (alpha) $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5 Image not benchmarked, Weaver (alpha) 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 Image $10.00 against Weaver (alpha) $0.75 per million output tokens, 13.3x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5 Image takes 400K tokens, Weaver (alpha) 8K.
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.
CodingNot comparableSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 38 boards here | |||
IntelligenceNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 2 boards here | |||
Agentic workNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 21 boards here | |||
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 13 boards here | |||
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 17 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 46 boards here | |||
Image generationDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image | Weaver (alpha) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: images | 1191 | Not measured | Only GPT-5 Image measured |
| Design Arena: graphic design | 1172 | Not measured | Only GPT-5 Image measured |
| Design Arena: logos | 1202 | Not measured | Only GPT-5 Image measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 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
Weaver (alpha) costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Weaver (alpha) costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Weaver (alpha) 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 Image | Mancer Weaver (alpha) |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Mancer |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | October 14, 2025 | August 2, 2023 |
| Context window | 400K | 8K |
| Input $/Mtok | $10.00 | $0.40 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $0.75 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5 Image better than Weaver (alpha) for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GPT-5 Image has the edge where the context window is larger, 400K against 8K tokens.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Image or Weaver (alpha)?
GPT-5 Image costs $10.00 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Weaver (alpha) costs $0.40 and $0.75. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5 Image or Weaver (alpha)?
GPT-5 Image, with 400K tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-5 Image vs Weaver (alpha) comparison based on?
0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5 Image's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Weaver (alpha)'s on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.