Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-5.2
83
GPT-5.5 Pro
100
Pick GPT-5.5 Pro 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.
Agentic
+34.9 difference
Knowledge
+35.2 difference
GPT-5.2
GPT-5.5 Pro
$1.75 / $14
$30 / $180
73 t/s
N/A
130.34s
N/A
400K
1M
Pick GPT-5.5 Pro 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.
GPT-5.5 Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 100 to 83. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.5 Pro's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 90.1 against 55.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is BrowseComp, 65.8% to 90.1%. GPT-5.2 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-5.5 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $30.00 input / $180.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.2. That is roughly 12.9x on output cost alone. GPT-5.5 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.2.
GPT-5.5 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 100 to 83. The biggest single separator in this matchup is BrowseComp, where the scores are 65.8% and 90.1%.
GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 57.2. GPT-5.5 Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
GPT-5.5 Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 90.1 versus 55.2. Inside this category, BrowseComp 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.