Agentic
Directional only- GPT-5.1-Codex
- 49.0
- Estimated · #65/154
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- 49.6
- Estimated · #62/154
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 5 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
GPT-5.1-Codex vs Pokee-Isaac 28B
Decision reading
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.
0 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Updated September 18, 2026. We do not rank this pair: at least one has no public score. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Both of these models will change. Get the price, version and retirement notices for the pair, each with its source. Follow model changes
Share or export
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Pokee-Isaac 28B has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Pokee-Isaac 28B has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Pokee-Isaac 28B has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Pokee-Isaac 28B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Pokee-Isaac 28B has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Pokee-Isaac 28B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
GPT-5.1-Codex and Pokee-Isaac 28B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Which one for a specific job
Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.
The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.
45.1GPT-5.1-Codex—Pokee-Isaac 28B
Not comparable · BenchAlign
The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
3 GPT-5.1-Codex only
7 Pokee-Isaac 28B only
- Shared results
- 0
- GPT-5.1-Codex only
- 3
- Pokee-Isaac 28B only
- 7
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
1 category rests on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Coding
Not comparable- GPT-5.1-Codex
- 45.1
- Estimated · #92/154
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 1 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- GPT-5.1-Codex
- 68.6
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- 38.6
- Unranked · 1 rankable row
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- GPT-5.1-Codex
- 51.8
- Estimated · #70/184
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- GPT-5.1-Codex
- Not ranked
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- GPT-5.1-Codex
- Not ranked
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- GPT-5.1-Codex
- 66.9
- Unranked · 1 rankable row
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- GPT-5.1-Codex
- 84.2
- #42/124
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | GPT-5.1-Codex | Pokee-Isaac 28B | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 49.0Estimated · #65/154 | 49.6Estimated · #62/154 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 2 vs 5 public rows | Directional only |
| Coding | 45.1Estimated · #92/154 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 1 vs 1 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | 68.6Unranked · 2 rankable rows | 38.6Unranked · 1 rankable row | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | 51.8Estimated · #70/184 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 0 vs 0 public rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | 66.9Unranked · 1 rankable row | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | 84.2#42/124 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
A shared-evidence shape is not available.
BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- GPT-5.1-Codex
- $0.00625
- Fits in one request
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- $0.00065
- Fits in one request
Pokee-Isaac 28B has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- GPT-5.1-Codex
- $0.0925
- Fits in one request
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- $0.0105
- Fits in one request
Pokee-Isaac 28B has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- GPT-5.1-Codex
- $0.15
- Fits in one request
- Pokee-Isaac 28B
- $0.043
- Fits in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Pokee-Isaac 28B has the lower modeled cost
Pokee-Isaac 28B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationGPT-5.1-CodexPokee-Isaac 28B
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
GPT-5.1-Codex
Pokee-Isaac 28B
API model ID
GPT-5.1-Codex
gpt-5.1-codex
OpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex model documentationPokee-Isaac 28B
pokee-isaac
Pokee-Isaac 28B model pageCached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
GPT-5.1-Codex
$0.125 per 1M cached input tokens
OpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex model documentationPokee-Isaac 28B
Not published
Pokee-Isaac 28B model pageDocumented inputs
GPT-5.1-Codex
Not sourced
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Not sourced
Documented outputs
GPT-5.1-Codex
Not sourced
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Not sourced
Provider availability
GPT-5.1-Codex
Not sourced
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
GPT-5.1-Codex
Reasoning
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Reasoning
Weight access
GPT-5.1-Codex
Proprietary
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Proprietary
License
GPT-5.1-Codex
Proprietary
Pokee-Isaac 28B
Proprietary
Release date
GPT-5.1-Codex
2025-10-15
Pokee-Isaac 28B
2026-08-03
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.0925 vs $0.0105. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.15 vs $0.043.
- Context tradeoff
- Pokee-Isaac 28B has the larger documented window (10M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence10 rows
Agentic
Gert Labs
GPT-5.1-Codex49.68%SourcePokee-Isaac 28B—Not directly comparable
JobBench
GPT-5.1-Codex26.2%SourcePokee-Isaac 28B—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
GPT-5.1-Codex—Pokee-Isaac 28B65.1%SourceNot directly comparable
BFCL v4
GPT-5.1-Codex—Pokee-Isaac 28B70.9%SourceNot directly comparable
τ³-bench results
GPT-5.1-Codex—Pokee-Isaac 28B66.2%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP-Atlas claim coverage
GPT-5.1-Codex—Pokee-Isaac 28B74.6%SourceNot directly comparable
PinchBench
GPT-5.1-Codex—Pokee-Isaac 28B95.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Reasoning
MRCRv2
GPT-5.1-Codex—Pokee-Isaac 28B60.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Questions
Which is better, GPT-5.1-Codex or Pokee-Isaac 28B?
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.1-Codex or Pokee-Isaac 28B?
Pokee-Isaac 28B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.1-Codex or Pokee-Isaac 28B?
Pokee-Isaac 28B scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 49.6 to 49. GPT-5.1-Codex and Pokee-Isaac 28B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which costs less, GPT-5.1-Codex or Pokee-Isaac 28B?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.00625 on GPT-5.1-Codex and $0.00065 on Pokee-Isaac 28B; repository review costs $0.0925 and $0.0105; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.15 and $0.043. Pokee-Isaac 28B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Which has the larger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex or Pokee-Isaac 28B?
Pokee-Isaac 28B has the larger documented context window: 10M, compared with 400K.
Related comparisons
Last updated September 18, 2026
Watch GPT-5.1-Codex vs Pokee-Isaac 28B
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.