GPT-5-Codex vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview vs Jamba Large
GPT-5-Codex comes out ahead, 42 to 35 and 30 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
OpenAI
GPT-5-Codex
42/100- ECI—
- Price$1.25 / $10.00
- Context400K
Google
Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview
35/100- ECI—
- Price$1.25 / $10.00
- Context128K
AI21 Labs
Jamba Large
30/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $8.00
- Context256K
GPT-5-Codex is our pick
GPT-5-Codex is the better all-round choice, scoring 42/100 against Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview (35) and Jamba Large (30). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceGPT-5-Codex and Gemini 2.5 Computer Use PreviewGPT-5-Codex $3.44 · Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview $3.44 · Jamba Large $3.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGPT-5-CodexGPT-5-Codex 400,000 · Jamba Large 256,000 · Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGPT-5-Codex and Gemini 2.5 Computer Use PreviewGPT-5-Codex: Text, Images · Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview: Text, Images · Jamba Large: Text
- Self-hostingJamba LargePublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GPT-5-Codex | Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview | Jamba Large |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 24 | 24 | 24 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 60 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 44 | 24 | 36 |
| Overall | 100% | 42/100 | 35/100 | 30/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $1.25 (best) | $1.25 (best) | $2.00 |
| Output | $10.00 | $10.00 | $8.00 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.44 (best) | $3.44 (best) | $3.50 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Over 200K: $2.50 / $15.00 | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | Official Google API | Official AI21 Labs API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 400,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens | 256,000 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens (best) | 64,000 tokens | 4,096 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | gemini-2.5-computer-use-preview-10-2025 | jamba-large |
| API providers | 3 (best) | 2 | 1 |
| Released | Sep 15, 2025 | Oct 7, 2025 | Jul 1, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 30, 2024 | Jan 2025 | Aug 22, 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
GPT-5-Codex$32.50
Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview$32.50
Jamba Large$36.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-5-Codex, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview or Jamba Large?
GPT-5-Codex is the better all-round choice, scoring 42/100 against Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview (35) and Jamba Large (30). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5-Codex, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview or Jamba Large?
GPT-5-Codex is cheaper at $1.25 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview costs $1.25 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price); Jamba Large costs $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official AI21 Labs API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.44 per million tokens for GPT-5-Codex versus $3.44 for Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview (1× as much) and $3.50 for Jamba Large (1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GPT-5-Codex has not been scored yet, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview has not been scored yet and Jamba Large has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-5-Codex, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview and Jamba Large yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5-Codex has the largest context window at 400,000 tokens, against 256,000 for Jamba Large and 128,000 for Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview. Maximum output per response: GPT-5-Codex up to 128,000, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview up to 64,000, Jamba Large up to 4,096 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-5-Codex accepts text and images; Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview accepts text and images; Jamba Large accepts text. GPT-5-Codex handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Jamba Large publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-5-Codex and Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview is the newest, released Oct 7, 2025. GPT-5-Codex came out Sep 15, 2025; Jamba Large came out Jul 1, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-5-Codex Sep 30, 2024, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview Jan 2025, Jamba Large Aug 22, 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.