Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
42
GPT-5.2
83
Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 3.5 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Coding
+15.7 difference
Knowledge
+33.0 difference
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
GPT-5.2
$null / $null
$2 / $8
N/A
73 t/s
N/A
130.34s
200K
400K
Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 3.5 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
GPT-5.2 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 83 to 42. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.2's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 92.4 against 59.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 59.4% to 92.4%.
GPT-5.2 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-5.2 gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 200K for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 83 to 42. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 59.4% and 92.4%.
GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 59.4. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GPT-5.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.7 versus 49. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.