| Signal | Cogito v2.1 671B | Delta | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 50 | -33 | |
Pricing | 1 | -9 | |
Context window size | 81 | -8 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -65 | |
| Overall Result | 0 wins | of 5 | 4 wins |
7
days higher
5
days
18
days higher
deepcogito
OpenAI
Cogito v2.1 671B saves you $437.50/month
That's $5250.00/year compared to GPT-5.1-Codex at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Cogito v2.1 671B | GPT-5.1-Codex | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40 | 40 | -- |
| Rank | #172 | #174 | Cogito v2.1 671B |
| Quality Rank | #172 | #174 | Cogito v2.1 671B |
| Adoption Rank | #172 | #174 | Cogito v2.1 671B |
| Parameters | 671B | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 128K | 400K | GPT-5.1-Codex |
| Pricing | $1.25/$1.25/M | $1.25/$10.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 50 | 83 | GPT-5.1-Codex |
| Pricing | 1 | 10 | GPT-5.1-Codex |
| Context window size | 81 | 89 | GPT-5.1-Codex |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Cogito v2.1 671B |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 85 | GPT-5.1-Codex |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 40/100 (rank #172), placing it in the top 41% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #174), placing it in the top 40% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Cogito v2.1 671B offers 78% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $37.50/month with Cogito v2.1 671B vs $168.75/month with GPT-5.1-Codex - a $131.25 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Cogito v2.1 671B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (400K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($1.25/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (40/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Cogito v2.1 671B and GPT-5.1-Codex are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Cogito v2.1 671B
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Cogito v2.1 671B
78% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Cogito v2.1 671B
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Cogito v2.1 671B
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Cogito v2.1 671B
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by deepcogito
| Capability | Cogito v2.1 671B | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
deepcogito
OpenAI
Cogito v2.1 671B saves you $10.50/month
That's 74% cheaper than GPT-5.1-Codex at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Cogito v2.1 671B | GPT-5.1-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 128K | 400K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | 128,000 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Nov 13, 2025 | Nov 13, 2025 |
Both Cogito v2.1 671B and GPT-5.1-Codex score 40/100, making them extremely close competitors. Choose based on pricing, provider ecosystem, or specific capability requirements.
Cogito v2.1 671B is ranked #172 and GPT-5.1-Codex is ranked #174 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Cogito v2.1 671B is cheaper at $1.25/M output tokens vs GPT-5.1-Codex's $10.00/M output tokens - 8.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: Cogito v2.1 671B at $1.25/M vs GPT-5.1-Codex at $1.25/M.
GPT-5.1-Codex has a larger context window of 400,000 tokens compared to Cogito v2.1 671B's 128,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.