Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha vs Apodex 1.1
Wins 1 of 5 areas
Reasoning
Wins 3 of 5 areas
Coding · Agents · Long documents
Apodex 1.1 is the stronger all-rounder.Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha is better at reasoning.
Scores updated · 15 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the five areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software02Apodex 1.12 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own12Apodex 1.12 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Apodex 1.11 of 1 test
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents rests on a single test.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Apodex 1.1 pulls ahead
- Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+12.8points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+9.7points ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+5.4points ahead
Where Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha pulls ahead
- Research-level physics problemsCritPt+6.3points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+1.8points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+1.2points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 15 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingApodex 1.1
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Apodex 1.1 by 2.76769.7+2.7
- SciCodeApodex 1.1 by 2.642.945.5+2.6
AgentsApodex 1.1
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingApodex 1.1 by 12.812.425.2+12.8
- GDPValApodex 1.1 by 5.429.434.8+5.4
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 330+3
ReasoningAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha
- CritPtAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 6.310.94.6+6.3
- GPQA DiamondAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 1.287.686.4+1.2
- Humanity's Last Examtie33.634.1tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationApodex 1.1 by 9.711.921.6+9.7
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 1.833.531.7+1.8
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA Agentic IndexApodex 1.1 by 7.229.436.6+7.2
- AA-OmniscienceApodex 1.1 by 3.2-25.1-21.9+3.2
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexApodex 1.1 by 258.860.8+2
- AA Intelligencetie26.826.4tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha or Apodex 1.1?
Apodex 1.1 wins three of the five areas where both have results: coding, agents and long documents. Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha wins reasoning. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Apodex 1.1. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 15 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 11 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.