Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Exaone 4.0 32B has the cleaner overall profile here, landing at 83 versus 80. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
GPT-5.3 Codex gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 128K for Exaone 4.0 32B.
Pick Exaone 4.0 32B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.3 Codex only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 400K context window.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Exaone 4.0 32B
81.8
GPT-5.3 Codex
93.5
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Exaone 4.0 32B
85.3
GPT-5.3 Codex
97.6
Exaone 4.0 32B is ahead overall, 83 to 80. The biggest single separator in this matchup is AIME 2025, where the scores are 85.3% and 98%.
GPT-5.3 Codex has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 93.5 versus 81.8. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GPT-5.3 Codex has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.6 versus 85.3. Inside this category, AIME 2025 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.