Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemma 4 E4B
38
GPT-5.2
79
Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E4B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Knowledge
+26.8 difference
Gemma 4 E4B
GPT-5.2
$0 / $0
$1.75 / $14
N/A
73 t/s
N/A
130.34s
128K
400K
Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 E4B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
GPT-5.2 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 79 to 38. 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 65.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 58.6% to 92.4%.
GPT-5.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 E4B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. GPT-5.2 gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 128K for Gemma 4 E4B.
GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 79 to 38. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 58.6% and 92.4%.
GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 65.6. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate 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.