Model comparison

GPT-5-Codex vs Step 3.5 Flash

Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5-Codex OpenAI

37.9

Rank #192 Reported

Step 3.5 Flash StepFun

42.3

Rank #116 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5-Codex leads 30.9 to 22.2.
  • Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5-Codex.
  • GPT-5-Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 256K.
  • Step 3.5 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5-Codex and Step 3.5 Flash specifications
GPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
ProviderOpenAIStepFun
Noometry Index37.942.3
Released2025-09-152026-01-29
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K256K
Max output128K256K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$10$0.30
Results tracked319

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

GPT-5-Codex: 42.4 (#103), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.4 (#105)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
WeirdML54.5%—
LMArena Coding—1436

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: 31.0 (#72), Step 3.5 Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
Terminal-Bench44.3%—

Reasoning GPT-5-Codex leads

GPT-5-Codex: 30.9 (#83), Step 3.5 Flash: 22.2 (#202)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)—28.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1411

Math Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Step 3.5 Flash: 42.6 (#84)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—66.8%
LMArena Math—1408

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Step 3.5 Flash: 39.6 (#132)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Expert—1421

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Step 3.5 Flash: 50.5 (#119)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Non-English—1385
LMArena Chinese—1447
LMArena French—1421
LMArena German—1405
LMArena Japanese—1354
LMArena Korean—1352
LMArena Russian—1385
LMArena Spanish—1419

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Step 3.5 Flash: 73.1 (#124)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following—1385

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Step 3.5 Flash: 42.8 (#117)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Longer Query—1402

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5-Codex: —, Step 3.5 Flash: 58.8 (#113)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5-CodexStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text—1403
LMArena Creative Writing—1357
LMArena Multi-Turn—1405

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5-Codex better than Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5-Codex or Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; GPT-5-Codex lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is GPT-5-Codex or Step 3.5 Flash better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (42.4 vs 42.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5-Codex does, with 400K tokens against 256K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5-Codex and Step 3.5 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5-Codex has 3 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.5 Flash has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper