Model comparison
Gemma 4 12B vs GPT-5.2
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 12B #137 (Estimated); GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 12B and GPT-5.2 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to Gemma 4 12B; 14 to GPT-5.2.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Gemma 4 12B only
- 9
- GPT-5.2 only
- 14
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 12B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 4 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 47.29. 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 77.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 78.8% to 92.4%. Gemma 4 12B does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-5.2 gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 12B.
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 | Gemma 4 12B | Δ | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | Margin← 42.3 | GPT-5.235.2 |
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | Margin→ 14.9 | GPT-5.292.4 |
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 12B69.1 | Margin→ 11.3 | GPT-5.280.4 |
| Reasoning | Gemma 4 12B43.4 | Margin→ 9.5 | GPT-5.252.9 |
| Agentic | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.255.7 |
| Coding | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.270.6 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 12B | GPT-5.2 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 12BNot available | GPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 12BNot available | GPT-5.273 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 12BNot available | GPT-5.2130.34 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 12B256K | GPT-5.2400K | GPT-5.2 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
Coding4 benchmarks
ReasoningGPT-5.2 wins5 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 78.8% | 92.4% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 78.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 77.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 5.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMLUSource | 83.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 22.0% | 42.2% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 75.3% | 90.3% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 14.8% | 35.4% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -51.9% | -1.0% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 16.0% | 43.8% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.8% | 79.7% | GPT-5.2 leads |
MathGemma 4 12B wins4 benchmarks
MultimodalGPT-5.2 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 69.1% | 79.5% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| MathVisionSource | 79.7% | 83.0% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | 48.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 69.7% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
| V*Source | — | 75.9% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1224 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.5% | 75.4% | GPT-5.2 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.43 to 47.29. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 78.8% and 92.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 77.5. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.2?
Gemma 4 12B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 77.5 versus 35.2. GPT-5.2 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for reasoning, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 52.9 versus 43.4. Inside this category, AA-LCR is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemma 4 12B or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 69.1. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.