Model comparison
GPT-5.1-Codex vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.2 vs 38.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 33.5 to 29.3.
Side by side
| GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.2 | 38.1 |
| Released | 2025-11-12 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 6 | 14 |
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: 41.7 (#107), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 37.9 (#171)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1314 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,245 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: 37.8 (#32), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 70.8% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 24.8 (#139)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1299 |
Math Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 29.3 (#218), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 33.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 9% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1298 |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 34.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1289 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 42.1 (#196)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1314 |
| LMArena German | — | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1271 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.4 (#194)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1275 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#180)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.5 (#186)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.2 vs 38.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.7 versus 37.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1-Codex has 6 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.