Model comparison

GPT-5.1-Codex vs Llama 2-13B

GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.1-Codex OpenAI

38.6

Rank #186 Reported

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.6

Rank #309 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.1-Codex leads 41.9 to 30.9.
  • Llama 2-13B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.1-Codex and Llama 2-13B specifications
GPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
ProviderOpenAIMeta
Noometry Index38.629.6
Released2025-11-122023-07-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$10—
Results tracked632

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads

GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116), Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)66%—
LMArena WebDev1337—
LMArena Coding—1062
ALE-Bench1,245—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33), Llama 2-13B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
Terminal-Bench60.4%—
METR Time Horizons70.8%—

Reasoning Not comparable

GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1051
DTBench—42.2%
BIG-Bench Hard—58.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—106.17
HellaSwag—80.7%
LAMBADA—76.5%
PIQA—80.8%
WinoGrande—72.8%

Math Too close to call

GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235), Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
ProofBench9%—
LMArena Math—1065
GSM8K—36.9%

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
LMArena Expert—1030
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.3%
BoolQ—82.4%
MMLU—55.6%
OpenBookQA—57%
TriviaQA—79.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Llama 2-13B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
ScienceQA—55.8%

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
LMArena Non-English—1024
LMArena Chinese—1001
LMArena French—1044
LMArena German—1009
LMArena Japanese—894
LMArena Korean—953
LMArena Russian—1055
LMArena Spanish—1087

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
LMArena Instruction Following—1045

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
LMArena Longer Query—1064

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexLlama 2-13B
LMArena Text—1084
LMArena Creative Writing—1047
LMArena Multi-Turn—1050

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Llama 2-13B?

GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-5.1-Codex or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1-Codex and Llama 2-13B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1-Codex has 6 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper