Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
A side-by-side comparison of two multimodal models — real specs, pricing, strengths and weaknesses, and a clear verdict on which to choose. Kept current by our agents.
Quick verdict: which should you choose?
Choose Claude Opus 4.7 if you need
- ✓fast output at 214.62 tokens per second for interactive coding sessions
- ✓low cost at $2 per million tokens on extended technical projects
- ✓400k-token context with native image and text support for coding tasks
- ✓specialized coding focus suitable for large but not million-token workflows
Choose GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini if you need
- ✓highest intelligence score (57.3) for complex reasoning and writing
- ✓1M-token context handling for very large multimodal inputs
- ✓versatile text, image, and file inputs with safety-aligned responses
- ✓strong performance on precision tasks despite higher latency
Verdict
Claude Opus 4.7 leads in raw intelligence (57.3 vs 38.6) and maximum context size (1M tokens), making it stronger for complex multimodal reasoning. GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini wins on speed (214.62 t/s vs 50.87 t/s) and price ($2 vs $25 per million tokens) while offering strong coding specialization and native image+text support. The choice hinges on whether users prioritize depth and scale or efficiency and cost for technical workflows.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini: side by side
| Spec | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 57.3 | 38.6 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Output speed | 51 t/s | 215 t/s | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini |
| Output price | $25.00/1M | $2.00/1M | GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini |
| Context | 1000K | 400K | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Params | — | — | Tie |
| Type | Proprietary | Proprietary | Tie |
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI | Tie |
Detailed analysis
Intelligence
Winner: Claude Opus 4.7Claude Opus 4.7 scores 57.3 on the intelligence index compared to 38.6 for GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini. This gap favors Claude for tasks requiring deep reasoning and writing quality. GPT-5.1's lower score aligns with its noted limitation of reduced depth on complex reasoning as a mini variant.
Speed
Winner: GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniGPT-5.1-Codex-Mini delivers 214.62 tokens per second versus Claude's 50.87 t/s. The speed advantage supports faster iteration in coding workflows. Claude's slower rate contributes to its noted higher latency on complex multimodal tasks.
Pricing
Winner: GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniGPT-5.1-Codex-Mini costs $2 per million tokens while Claude Opus 4.7 costs $25 per million tokens. The 12.5x price difference makes GPT-5.1 far more economical for high-volume use. Both are proprietary models from their respective providers.
Context & Modalities
Winner: Claude Opus 4.7Claude Opus 4.7 offers a 1M-token context window versus GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini's 400k tokens and supports text, image, and file inputs. GPT-5.1 is limited to image and text modalities. Claude's larger context enables more effective handling of very large multimodal inputs.
Claude Opus 4.7
Pros
- +Handles very large contexts effectively
- +Strong reasoning and writing quality
- +Versatile with text, image, and file inputs
- +Careful and safety-aligned responses
Cons
- –Can be overly cautious or refuse edge cases
- –Higher latency on complex multimodal tasks
- –No native real-time web access
GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Pros
- +Very large context window
- +Strong coding specialization
- +Native image + text support
- +Suitable for extended technical workflows
Cons
- –Mini variant may have reduced depth on complex reasoning
- –Limited to image and text modalities
- –Trade-off between context size and response speed
Summary: Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
Select GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini for speed-critical, budget-conscious coding work with image support. Choose Claude Opus 4.7 when maximum intelligence, context scale, and input versatility are required despite higher cost and latency.
Frequently asked questions
Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on intelligence and offers larger context with more input types, while GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini is faster and cheaper with coding specialization.