Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.2 vs Grok 4

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.

OpenAI
58.43/100
Margin
2.0pts
winning →
60.42/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated); Grok 4 #50 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.2 and Grok 4 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to GPT-5.2; 2 to Grok 4.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
14
GPT-5.2 only
14
Grok 4 only
2
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Grok 4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.2 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 400K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Grok 4 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 60.42 versus 58.43. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

GPT-5.2 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok 4 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-5.2 gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 128K for Grok 4.

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 and Grok 4
CategoryGPT-5.2ΔGrok 4
MathGPT-5.235.2Margin 19.9Grok 415.3
AgenticGPT-5.255.7MarginNo overlapGrok 4Not measured
CodingGPT-5.270.6MarginNo overlapGrok 4Not measured
ReasoningGPT-5.252.9MarginNo overlapGrok 4Not measured
KnowledgeGPT-5.292.4MarginNo overlapGrok 4Not measured
MultimodalGPT-5.280.4MarginNo overlapGrok 4Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · GPT-5.2B · Grok 4
  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 40.700%B 19.655%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 21
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-5.2 scored 40.700%; Grok 4 scored 19.655%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 18.800%B 2.083%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 16.7
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GPT-5.2 scored 18.800%; Grok 4 scored 2.083%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-5.2Grok 4Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 outputGrok 4Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.273 tok/sGrok 454 tok/sGPT-5.2 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.2130.34 sGrok 415.60 sGrok 4 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.2400KGrok 4128KGPT-5.2 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4Result
BrowseCompSource 65.8%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 47.3%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 84.8%74.9%GPT-5.2 leads
Gert LabsSource 46.54%42.34%GPT-5.2 leads
JobBenchSource 34.3%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 55.6%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 53.50%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 52.1%45.7%GPT-5.2 leads
React Native EvalsSource 72.6%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4Result
ARC-AGI-2Source 52.9%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 72.7%68.0%GPT-5.2 leads
CritPtSource 11.6%2.0%GPT-5.2 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4Result
GPQASource 92.4%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.2%33.3%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 90.3%87.7%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-HLESource 35.4%23.9%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -1.0%3.8%Grok 4 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.8%41.4%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 79.7%64.2%Grok 4 leads
MathGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4Result
AA AIME 2025Source 99.0%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 40.700%19.655%GPT-5.2 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 18.800%2.083%GPT-5.2 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4Result
MMMU-ProSource 79.5%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 83.0%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.1%Not comparable
V*Source 75.9%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1227Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 68.8%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4Result
AA-IFBenchSource 75.4%53.7%GPT-5.2 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GPT-5.2 or Grok 4?

Grok 4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.42 to 58.43. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 40.700% and 19.655%.

Which is better for math, GPT-5.2 or Grok 4?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 35.2 versus 15.3. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

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.