Apodex 1.1 vs Celeris-1
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or Celeris-1 by Celeris? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Apodex 1.1 scores 20.1 points higher (26.4 vs 6.3) but costs 16× as much to run the benchmark ($939 vs $60.0; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Apodex 1.1 when you need intelligence above 6.3, and Celeris-1 when 6.3 is enough.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | Celeris-1 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 6.3 | −76.1% Celeris-1 is 76.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $59.99 | −93.6% Celeris-1 is 93.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 0.87s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $3.00 | $0.20 / $0.70 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Celeris-1 vs Apodex 1.1: 76.1% less intelligence, 93.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Apodex 1.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Celeris-1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Medium) scores 34.50 for $56.4.
Apodex 1.1Celeris-1Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/celeris-1 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/celeris-1?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill