Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.2-Codex vs Kimi K2.5

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

59.1/100
Margin
0.6pts
winning →
Moonshot AI
59.66/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.2-Codex #58 (Supported); Kimi K2.5 #54 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K2.5 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to GPT-5.2-Codex; 49 to Kimi K2.5.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
14
GPT-5.2-Codex only
1
Kimi K2.5 only
49
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K2.5 is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

GPT-5.2-Codex is priced at $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.60 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens for Kimi K2.5. GPT-5.2-Codex has the larger context window at 400K, compared with 256K for Kimi K2.5.

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 GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K2.5
CategoryGPT-5.2-CodexΔKimi K2.5
AgenticGPT-5.2-CodexNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.555.0
CodingGPT-5.2-CodexNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.559.4
ReasoningGPT-5.2-CodexNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.561.0
KnowledgeGPT-5.2-CodexNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.556.9
MathGPT-5.2-CodexNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.560.6
MultilingualGPT-5.2-CodexNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.582.3
MultimodalGPT-5.2-CodexNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.578.5
Inst. FollowingGPT-5.2-CodexNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.593.9

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.2-Codex$1.75 input / $14 outputKimi K2.5$0.6 input / $3 outputKimi K2.5 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.2-Codex123 tok/sKimi K2.545 tok/sGPT-5.2-Codex has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.2-Codex87.34 sKimi K2.52.38 sKimi K2.5 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.2-Codex400KKimi K2.5256KGPT-5.2-Codex lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 92.1%95.9%Kimi K2.5 leads
Gert LabsSource 51.79%45.88%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
JobBenchSource 26.0%8.7%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 50.8%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 60.6%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 52.3%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 54.3%Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource 65.7%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 77.1%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 14.4%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 27.8%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 29.5%Not comparable
MCP-TasksSource 59.1%Not comparable
WideResearchSource 72.7%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 11.5%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 14.0%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 25.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1009Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Result
Vibe Code BenchSource 37.91%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 54.6%49.0%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 76.8%Not comparable
SWE-bench Verified*Source 70.8%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source 85.0%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 50.7%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 73%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource 58.5%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 77.2%Not comparable
SciCodeSource 48.7%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 46.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Result
AA-LCRSource 75.7%65.3%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
CritPtSource 8.7%3.1%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
LongBench v2Source 61%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 40.1%35.4%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 89.9%87.9%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
AA-HLESource 33.5%29.4%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -2.5%-8.1%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 40.7%34.3%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 72.8%64.6%Kimi K2.5 leads
GPQASource 87.6%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 87.6%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 69.2%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 87.1%Not comparable
MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source 87.1%Not comparable
HLESource 30.1%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Result
AIME 2025Source 96.1%Not comparable
AIME26Source 95.8%Not comparable
AIME25 (Arcee)Source 96.3%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 95.4%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 91.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 87.1%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 81.8%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 27.900%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.200%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Result
MMLU-ProXSource 82.3%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 56.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 76.3%75.4%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
MMMU-ProSource 78.5%Not comparable
Video-MMESource 87.4%Not comparable
MMVUSource 80.4%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 86.6%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1282Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K2.5Result
AA-IFBenchSource 77.6%70.2%GPT-5.2-Codex leads
IFEvalSource 93.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K2.5 on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K2.5 today?

GPT-5.2-Codex: $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens Kimi K2.5: $0.60 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

GPT-5.2-Codex
API / mo$11,813
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Kimi K2.5
API / mo$2,700
Self-host / mo$5,221
Break-even132M/day
Model the full break-even

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.