Antigravity SDK vs. Codex
Comparison between Antigravity SDK and Codex across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, including benchmark scores, cost, execution time, and token usage.
For details relating to our methodology, see our methodology page.
Explore other comparisons
vs
Comparison
Side-by-side comparison of Antigravity SDK and Codex.
Coding Agent Comparison
Metric |  Antigravity SDKGemini 3.8 Flash (High) |  CodexGPT-6 Astra (Max) | Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|
Agent Harness | Antigravity SDK | Codex | |
Representative Model | Gemini 3.8 Flash (High) | GPT-6 Astra (Max) | |
Coding Agent Index | 33 | 55 | Codex has a higher Coding Agent Index than Antigravity SDK |
FrontierCode v1.1 | 41% | 49% | Codex has a higher FrontierCode v1.1 score than Antigravity SDK |
Terminal-Bench 4.0 | 15% | 56% | Codex has a higher Terminal-Bench 4.0 score than Antigravity SDK |
SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA | 44% | 59% | Codex has a higher SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA score than Antigravity SDK |
Cost per Task | $2.51 | $7.04 | Antigravity SDK has a lower cost per task than Codex |
Time per Task | 13.1m | 24.8m | Antigravity SDK has a lower time per task than Codex |
Turns per Task | 202.5 | 39.4 | Codex has a lower turns per task than Antigravity SDK |
Token Usage per Task | 14.3M | 3.2M | Codex has a lower token usage per task than Antigravity SDK |
Cache Hit Rate | 88% | 93% | Codex has a higher cache hit rate than Antigravity SDK |
Model Variants
Evaluated model variants for Antigravity SDK and Codex.
Model Variants
| Antigravity SDK | Gemini 3.8 Flash (High) | high | 33 | 41% | 15% | 44% | $2.51 | 13.1m | 14.3M |
| Codex | GPT-6 Astra (Max) | max | 55 | 49% | 56% | 59% | $7.04 | 24.8m | 3.2M |
| Codex | GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) | max | 54 | 49% | 53% | 60% | $1.50 | 23.7m | 3.9M |
| Codex | GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) | xhigh | 48 | 45% | 46% | 54% | $0.69 | 16.4m | 6.9M |
| Codex | GPT-6.1 Terra (Max) | max | 48 | 42% | 48% | 54% | $1.24 | 26.1m | 12.3M |
| Codex |  DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) | max | 47 | 53% | 28% | 61% | $0.39 | 38.1m | 27.2M |
| Codex | GPT-6.1 Terra (High) | high | 46 | 43% | 42% | 53% | $0.54 | 12.7m | 5.6M |
| Codex | GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) | medium | 42 | 44% | 35% | 47% | $0.39 | 10.2m | 4.1M |
| Codex | GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) | non-reasoning | 39 | 46% | 25% | 46% | $0.45 | 9.5m | 5.8M |
| Codex | GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) | low | 35 | 41% | 25% | 39% | $0.20 | 6.3m | 1.9M |
| Codex | GPT-6 Luna (Max) | max | 31 | 40% | 16% | 38% | $0.16 | 21.3m | 8.9M |
Performance
Performance across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index v2.0 incorporates 3 benchmarks: FrontierCode v1.1, Terminal-Bench 4.0, and SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA · Higher is better
Color by
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Cost per Task
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average pay-per-token API cost per task (USD)
Color by
Most attractive quadrant
Pareto line
Token Usage
Token consumption across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.
Token Usage per Task
Average input, cache, and output tokens per task
Prompt cache hit rates can vary significantly by provider routing, which can materially change effective cost.
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Total Tokens
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average total tokens per task
Color by
Most attractive quadrant
Cost
Pay-per-token API cost across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, based on current per-token pricing.
Cost per Task
Average pay-per-token API cost per task (USD) · Lower is better
Color by
Execution Time
Active agent runtime across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.
Time per Task
Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better
Color by
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Execution Time
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average agent wall time per task
Color by
Most attractive quadrant