Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 4 Sonnet vs GPT-5.2

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

42.79/100
Margin
15.6pts
winning →
OpenAI
58.43/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4 Sonnet #158 (Supported); GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 4 Sonnet and GPT-5.2 share 15 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 4 Sonnet; 13 to GPT-5.2.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
15
Claude 4 Sonnet only
1
GPT-5.2 only
13
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GPT-5.2 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 58.43 to 42.79. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude 4 Sonnet is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.2. GPT-5.2 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 4 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 4 Sonnet.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude 4 Sonnet and GPT-5.2
CategoryClaude 4 SonnetΔGPT-5.2
CodingClaude 4 Sonnet72.7Margin 2.1GPT-5.270.6
AgenticClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.255.7
ReasoningClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.252.9
KnowledgeClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.292.4
MathClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.235.2
MultimodalClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.280.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude 4 SonnetB · GPT-5.2
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 72.7%B 80%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 7.3
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4 Sonnet scored 72.7%; GPT-5.2 scored 80%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude 4 SonnetGPT-5.2Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 4 Sonnet$3 input / $15 outputGPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 outputGPT-5.2 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 4 Sonnet40 tok/sGPT-5.273 tok/sGPT-5.2 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 4 Sonnet1.33 sGPT-5.2130.34 sClaude 4 Sonnet reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 4 Sonnet200KGPT-5.2400KGPT-5.2 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGPT-5.2Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 52.3%84.8%GPT-5.2 leads
Gert LabsSource 39.66%46.54%GPT-5.2 leads
JobBenchSource 18.4%34.3%GPT-5.2 leads
BrowseCompSource 65.8%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 47.3%Not comparable
CodingClaude 4 Sonnet wins
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGPT-5.2Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 72.7%80%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 37.3%52.1%GPT-5.2 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 55.6%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 53.50%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGPT-5.2Result
AA-LCRSource 44.3%72.7%GPT-5.2 leads
CritPtSource 1.1%11.6%GPT-5.2 leads
ARC-AGI-2Source 52.9%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGPT-5.2Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.5%42.2%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 68.3%90.3%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-HLESource 4.0%35.4%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -9.2%-1.0%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 22.4%43.8%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 40.8%79.7%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
GPQASource 92.4%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGPT-5.2Result
AA AIME 2025Source 99.0%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 40.700%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 18.800%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGPT-5.2Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 62.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 11781227GPT-5.2 leads
MMMU-ProSource 79.5%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 83.0%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.1%Not comparable
V*Source 75.9%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGPT-5.2Result
AA-IFBenchSource 45.4%75.4%GPT-5.2 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude 4 Sonnet or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.43 to 42.79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 72.7% and 80%.

Which is better for coding, Claude 4 Sonnet or GPT-5.2?

Claude 4 Sonnet has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.7 versus 70.6. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 20, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.