// head_to_head

GPT-5.2 vs GPT-5.2-Codex

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

GPT-5.2 and GPT-5.2-Codex are close on both score and price.

Neither model separates itself on published score or list price. Pick on the things this table cannot measure: latency under your load, context window headroom, tool-calling reliability, and whichever provider you already have a contract with.

openai

GPT-5.2

Blended / 1M
$4.81
Context
400K
Released
Dec 10, 2025
Overall score
74.6
reasoningtool callingfile inputimage inputprompt caching

openai

GPT-5.2-Codex

Blended / 1M
$4.81
Context
400K
Released
Jan 14, 2026
Overall score
74.0
reasoningtool callingimage inputprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricGPT-5.2GPT-5.2-Codex
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

74.674.0
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.1289$0.1001win
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$4.81$4.81
Input price / 1M$1.75$1.75
Output price / 1M$14.00$14.00
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.175$0.175
Context window400K400K
Max output tokens128K128K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — GPT-5.2 on top, GPT-5.2-Codex below, both out of 100.

Agentic codingtoo close to call
50.3
49.4
Coding
76.1
83.6
Reasoning
83.2
77.7
Mathematics
93.2
88.8
Data analysistoo close to call
78.2
78.2
Language
79.8
73.7
Instruction following
61.8
66.4

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadGPT-5.2GPT-5.2-Codex
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$1426.60/mo$1426.60/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$1610.00/mo$1610.00/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$1638.00/mo$1638.00/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$2721.25/mo$2721.25/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$4987.50/mo$4987.50/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You are running this at volume

GPT-5.2-Codex

Lowest measured cost per point of capability at $0.1001 per point — the gap compounds with every request.

GPT-5.2 vs GPT-5.2-Codex FAQ

Which is better, GPT-5.2 or GPT-5.2-Codex?

GPT-5.2 and GPT-5.2-Codex are close on both score and price. Neither model separates itself on published score or list price. Pick on the things this table cannot measure: latency under your load, context window headroom, tool-calling reliability, and whichever provider you already have a contract with.

Is GPT-5.2 cheaper than GPT-5.2-Codex?

They cost about the same. Both land near $4.81 per million tokens on a 3:1 input:output blend, so price is unlikely to be the deciding factor between them.

GPT-5.2 vs GPT-5.2-Codex: which scores higher on benchmarks?

GPT-5.2 scores 74.6 and GPT-5.2-Codex scores 74.0 overall on LiveBench, the mean of its seven categories. That gap is inside the range that effort settings alone move a score, so treat them as equivalent on published quality. Category scores differ from the overall figure — a model can lead on reasoning and trail on coding, which the per-category table above breaks out.

Which gives better value for money, GPT-5.2 or GPT-5.2-Codex?

GPT-5.2-Codex. Cost per point divides the measured dollars LiveBench spent running the benchmark by the score it earned, so it captures something token pricing misses: a reasoning model can emit many times more tokens than its per-token rate suggests. GPT-5.2 works out at $0.1289 per point and GPT-5.2-Codex at $0.1001.

Does GPT-5.2 or GPT-5.2-Codex have a bigger context window?

They are effectively the same — 400K for GPT-5.2 and 400K for GPT-5.2-Codex.

Do GPT-5.2 and GPT-5.2-Codex support prompt caching?

Both publish a cached-input rate: $0.175 per million for GPT-5.2 and $0.175 for GPT-5.2-Codex, against full input rates of $1.75 and $1.75. On a workload with a long stable prefix — a system prompt, a tool schema, a retrieved corpus — that changes the economics more than the headline price does.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.