Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs GPT-5.2

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 24 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

64.22/100
Margin
5.8pts
← winning
GPT-5.2
OpenAI
58.43/100
4 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #34 (Supported); GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.2 share 24 comparable benchmark results. 6 of 8 categories are comparable. 35 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 4 to GPT-5.2.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
24
Claude Opus 4.5 only
35
GPT-5.2 only
4
Comparable categories
6 / 8

Pick Claude Opus 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.2 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 24 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 6 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Opus 4.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 64.22 to 58.43. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Opus 4.5's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 57.5 against 35.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 20.690% to 40.700%. GPT-5.2 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Opus 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 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 Opus 4.5 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 Opus 4.5.

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 Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.2
CategoryClaude Opus 4.5ΔGPT-5.2
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.558.1Margin→ 34.3GPT-5.292.4
MathClaude Opus 4.557.5Margin← 22.3GPT-5.235.2
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.564.4Margin← 11.5GPT-5.252.9
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.569.9Margin→ 10.5GPT-5.280.4
AgenticClaude Opus 4.562.6Margin← 6.9GPT-5.255.7
CodingClaude Opus 4.571.7Margin← 1.1GPT-5.270.6
MultilingualClaude Opus 4.585.7MarginNo overlapGPT-5.2Not measured
Inst. FollowingClaude Opus 4.569.5MarginNo overlapGPT-5.2Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Opus 4.5B · GPT-5.2

  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 20.690%B 40.700%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 20
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Opus 4.5 scored 20.690%; GPT-5.2 scored 40.700%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

  2. OSWorld-Verified

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 66.3%B 47.3%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 19
    OSWorld-Verified: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 66.3%; GPT-5.2 scored 47.3%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark.

  3. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 4.167%B 18.800%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 14.6
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Opus 4.5 scored 4.167%; GPT-5.2 scored 18.800%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

  4. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 68.5%B 82.1%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 13.6
    CharXiv: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 68.5%; GPT-5.2 scored 82.1%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

  5. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 70.6%B 79.5%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 8.9
    MMMU-Pro: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 70.6%; GPT-5.2 scored 79.5%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 outputGPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 outputGPT-5.2 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.546 tok/sGPT-5.273 tok/sGPT-5.2 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.51.01 sGPT-5.2130.34 sClaude Opus 4.5 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.5200KGPT-5.2400KGPT-5.2 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticClaude Opus 4.5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.3%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 66.3%47.3%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
OSWorldSource 66.3%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 59.6%—Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 52.3%—Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource 70.2%—Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 23.3%—Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 26.4%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 43.5%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 42.3%—Not comparable
MCP-TasksSource 71.8%—Not comparable
WideResearchSource 76.4%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource 50.6%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 86.3%84.8%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Gert LabsSource 64.23%46.54%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
JobBenchSource 32.3%34.3%GPT-5.2 leads
BrowseCompSource —65.8%Not comparable
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.9%80%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
LiveCodeBench v6Source 84.8%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 57.1%55.6%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 77.5%—Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 43.2%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 47.0%52.1%GPT-5.2 leads
Vibe Code BenchSource —53.50%Not comparable
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Result
LongBench v2Source 64.4%—Not comparable
AI-NeedleSource 74%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 65.3%72.7%GPT-5.2 leads
CritPtSource 0.3%11.6%GPT-5.2 leads
ARC-AGI-2Source —52.9%Not comparable
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Result
GPQASource 87%92.4%GPT-5.2 leads
SuperGPQASource 70.6%—Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 89.5%—Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 96.6%—Not comparable
C-EvalSource 92.2%—Not comparable
HLESource 30.8%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 34.7%42.2%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 81.0%90.3%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-HLESource 12.9%35.4%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -3.9%-1.0%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 40.7%43.8%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 75.4%79.7%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
AA MMLU-ProSource 88.9%—Not comparable
MathClaude Opus 4.5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Result
AIME26Source 95.1%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 92.9%—Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 93.3%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 85.3%—Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 84.0%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 20.690%40.700%GPT-5.2 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%18.800%GPT-5.2 leads
AA AIME 2025Source —99.0%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Result
MMLU-ProXSource 85.7%—Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 56.7%—Not comparable
MultimodalGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Result
MMMU-ProSource 70.6%79.5%GPT-5.2 leads
MathVisionSource 74.3%83.0%GPT-5.2 leads
CharXivSource 68.5%82.1%GPT-5.2 leads
VideoMMMUSource 84.4%—Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 45.7%—Not comparable
V*Source 67.0%75.9%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 71.2%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12791227Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Result
IFEvalSource 90.9%—Not comparable
IFBenchSource 58%—Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 43.0%75.4%GPT-5.2 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (7)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.2?

Claude Opus 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 64.22 to 58.43. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 20.690% and 40.700%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 58.1. Inside this category, AA-HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.2?

Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 70.6. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.2?

Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 57.5 versus 35.2. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.2?

Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 64.4 versus 52.9. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.2?

Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.6 versus 55.7. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 69.9. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
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.