WritingmateWritingmate
Model Comparison

KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 vs GPT-5.3 CodexWhich Is Better in 2026?

KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 vs GPT-5.3 Codex: which should you choose in 2026?

KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 (by KwaiPilot) and GPT-5.3 Codex (by OpenAI) are compared below. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price, and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader.

KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 is about 3.7× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($1.30 vs $4.81 per 1M tokens).

GPT-5.3 Codex has the larger context window (400,000 tokens vs 256,000 tokens).

Choose KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 if…

  • lower blended API cost matters for your workload

Choose GPT-5.3 Codex if…

  • you work with longer documents, transcripts, or codebases
  • you need a model with explicit reasoning support
  • you need image inputs

The benchmark count includes only results measured with a matching benchmark version and protocol. Arena scores are shown separately. Missing, preliminary, and incompatible data is not treated as a controlled win. Published point-score comparisons are labeled separately when protocol details are incomplete. For text-output models, the verdict also compares token pricing and context windows.

vs

Performance benchmarks

Every value links to its source. A dash means that no reviewed result is available for that exact model and protocol.

KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 and GPT-5.3 Codex benchmark results
BenchmarkKAT-Coder-Pro V2.5GPT-5.3 Codex
AutomationBench-AA

A 657-task benchmark of multi-step work across simulated SaaS applications in six business domains. The Artificial Analysis protocol reports a guardrail-aware score and is distinct from both the public Zapier split and the unrelated dynamic AutoBench framework.

Guardrail-aware score

BrowseComp

A benchmark of difficult, verifiable information-seeking questions designed to measure an agent's ability to locate hard-to-find facts through web browsing.

Accuracy

OSWorld-Verified

A verified computer-use benchmark in which multimodal agents operate desktop applications and are graded from the resulting environment state.

Mean task reward

SWE-Bench Pro

A contamination-resistant software-engineering benchmark with long-horizon tasks across multiple programming languages. Public and private splits are distinct protocols.

Resolved

SWE-Bench Verified

A human-validated subset of real GitHub issues used to measure whether a coding agent can produce repository patches that resolve the associated tests.

Resolved

SWE-Lancer (IC-Diamond subset)

The individual-contributor Diamond subset of SWE-Lancer, which evaluates economically valuable real-world software-engineering tasks.

Tasks completed

Terminal-Bench 2.0

Version 2.0 of the benchmark for completing realistic tasks in terminal environments. Results must not be merged with Terminal-Bench 2.1.

Pass rate

Terminal-Bench 2.1

Version 2.1 of the benchmark for completing realistic tasks in terminal environments. Harness, resource limits, and attempt count are part of the protocol.

Mean task success

AutoBench

A dynamic LLM evaluation framework in which models generate questions, answer them, and participate in reciprocal peer assessment. AutoBench is distinct from Zapier's AutomationBench.

Weighted peer-assessment score

GPQA Diamond

The highest-quality subset of Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A, designed to test expert-level scientific reasoning in biology, physics, and chemistry.

Accuracy

Humanity's Last Exam

A 2,500-question expert-level benchmark spanning dozens of academic fields. Tool-assisted and no-tools results are separate protocols and must not be merged.

Accuracy

Cybersecurity CTFs

Capture-the-flag challenges used to evaluate an agent's practical cybersecurity task performance.

Challenges completed

Arena preference scores
Arena (Code/WebDev)

Human preference score for code and web development

Ambiguous / conflicting rows

Benchmark sources

Reviewed evidence last updated 2026-08-09. Arena data last refreshed Aug 18, 2026.

Pricing, capabilities, and model facts

KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 and GPT-5.3 Codex model facts
FeatureKAT-Coder-Pro V2.5GPT-5.3 Codex
Context & model facts
DeveloperKwaiPilotOpenAI
API providerKwaipilotOpenAI
Input context256,000 tokens400,000 tokens
Maximum output80,000 tokens128,000 tokens
ReleasedFeb 5, 2026
Added to WritingmateJul 10, 2026Feb 24, 2026
LicenseNot availableProprietary
Knowledge cutoffNot disclosed
Capabilities
InputsTextText, Image, File
OutputsTextText
Provider endpoint accepts tool parametersYesYes
ReasoningNoYes
VisionNoYes
Image GenerationNoNo
Video GenerationNoNo
API pricing
Input (per 1M tokens)$0.74$1.75
Output (per 1M tokens)$2.96$14.00
Blended 3:1 input/output$1.30$4.81
API performance
p95 latencyNot measuredNot measured
Output throughputNot measuredNot measured
Writingmate shows API performance only when both models have enough observations from the same measurement window, prompt profile, and provider. Third-party latency values are not copied into this table.

Data sources

Catalog data last updated Jul 10, 2026.

Why Pay for Multiple Subscriptions?

Comparing KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 from KwaiPilot with GPT-5.3 Codex from OpenAI? Instead of managing separate API keys and subscriptions, get both with Writingmate.

Subscription-plan access for KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 and GPT-5.3 Codex
PlanPriceKAT-Coder-Pro V2.5GPT-5.3 CodexAI ImagesAI Video
Writingmate Pro
Most popular
$20/moIncludedIncludedNano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & moreSora 2, VEO 3.1
Writingmate Ultimate
Power users
$60/moIncludedIncludedNano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & moreSora 2, VEO 3.1

KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 vs GPT-5.3 Codex FAQ

Which is better, KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 or GPT-5.3 Codex?

There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader. KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 is about 3.7× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($1.30 vs $4.81 per 1M tokens). GPT-5.3 Codex has the larger context window (400,000 tokens vs 256,000 tokens).

Which model is cheaper to use through an API?

KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 is about 3.7× cheaper on a blended 3:1 input/output basis ($1.30 vs $4.81 per 1M tokens).

Which model supports more context?

GPT-5.3 Codex has the larger context window (400,000 tokens vs 256,000 tokens).

Can I switch between KAT-Coder-Pro V2.5 and GPT-5.3 Codex?

Yes. Use the model selector on this page to open any current Writingmate model comparison. You can also run the same prompt with both models in Writingmate.