Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs GPT-5.1-Codex
GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.2 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.1-Codex leads 41.7 to 29.6.
- Gemma 1.1 2b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 38.2 |
| Released | — | 2025-11-12 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 400K |
| Max output | — | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $10 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 6 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 29.6 (#294), GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.7 (#107)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 66% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1337 |
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,245 |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, GPT-5.1-Codex: 37.8 (#32)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 60.4% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 70.8% |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 18.2 (#268), GPT-5.1-Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | — |
Math GPT-5.1-Codex leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 28.3 (#230), GPT-5.1-Codex: 29.3 (#218)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 9% |
| LMArena Math | 1047 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.0 (#255), GPT-5.1-Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.7 (#284), GPT-5.1-Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1011 | — |
| LMArena German | 944 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 50.1 (#294), GPT-5.1-Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.5 (#281), GPT-5.1-Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.3 (#301), GPT-5.1-Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 958 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than GPT-5.1-Codex?
GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.2 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or GPT-5.1-Codex better for coding?
GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.7 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and GPT-5.1-Codex share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.1-Codex has 6.