Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 1M | 200k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $1.50 | — |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $7.50 | — |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | $0.075 | — |
| $675Google list price | — | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1Agentic scientific computing — The same command-line setup as Terminal-Bench, pointed at scientific work: the AI has to drive research tooling and computational workflows through to a result, rather than administer a machine. Version 0.1 is the first release of the task set, and scores run lower than on the general board. Higher is better. | 51.4% | — |
OSWorld 2.1 · offlineAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Version 2.1, in its offline setting. Scores are not comparable with version 2.0. Higher is better. | 77.6% | — |
AutomationBench (Artificial Analysis)Business workflows — The same business-workflow test, run by Artificial Analysis rather than by the lab, and graded strict pass@1: a workflow counts only if the whole of it is right on the first attempt. Read it as a separate board from the lab-run AutomationBench scores. Higher is better. | 76.1% | — |
Vending-Bench 2 (USD)Business simulation — ending bank balance in US dollars in Andon Labs’ vending-business simulation; higher is better | 14549 | — |
Chartography · no toolsChart tasks — The same chart-centred test with no tools: the AI has to read each chart unaided. Scores run far lower than the with-tools version, so read the two as separate tests. Higher is better. | 66.6% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | OpenAI | |
| Release date | Nov 12 2026 | May 16 2025 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Gemini 4 HydrogenvsClaude Fable 5.2codex-mini-latestvsClaude Fable 5.2Gemini 4 HydrogenvsMuse Embercodex-mini-latestvsMuse EmberGemini 4 HydrogenvsGrok 4.7codex-mini-latestvsGrok 4.7Gemini 4 HydrogenvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017codex-mini-latestvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Gemini 4 HydrogenvsMistral Large 4codex-mini-latestvsMistral Large 4Gemini 4 HydrogenvsKimi K3.1 Procodex-mini-latestvsKimi K3.1 ProFrequently asked questions
Gemini 4 Hydrogen and codex-mini-latest don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only Gemini 4 Hydrogen has a verified first-party price for an available API: $1.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens. No currently available pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for codex-mini-latest. codex-mini-latest shipped 545 days before Gemini 4 Hydrogen, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Gemini 4 Hydrogen) vs 200k (codex-mini-latest).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Gemini 4 Hydrogen and codex-mini-latest don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.