Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

GPT-5.2 vs Grok 4.20

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 8 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

GPT-5.2
OpenAI
57.62/100
Margin
3.7pts
← winning
53.88/100
3 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.2 #71 (Estimated); Grok 4.20 #93 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.2 and Grok 4.20 share 8 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to GPT-5.2; 11 to Grok 4.20.

Updated July 28, 2026
Shared results
8
GPT-5.2 only
20
Grok 4.20 only
11
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.20 only becomes the better choice if reasoning is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 8 shared benchmark results across 4 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, 57.62 to 53.88. 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 multimodal & grounded, where it averages 80.4 against 70.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is CharXiv, 82.1% to 60.9%. Grok 4.20 does hit back in reasoning, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

GPT-5.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens for Grok 4.20. That is roughly 2.3x on output cost alone. Grok 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.2.

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 4.20
CategoryGPT-5.2ΔGrok 4.20
MultimodalGPT-5.280.4Margin← 10.3Grok 4.2070.1
AgenticGPT-5.255.7Margin← 8.6Grok 4.2047.1
CodingGPT-5.270.6Margin← 3.5Grok 4.2067.1
ReasoningGPT-5.252.9Margin→ 0.4Grok 4.2053.3
KnowledgeGPT-5.292.4MarginNo overlapGrok 4.20Not measured
MathGPT-5.235.2MarginNo overlapGrok 4.20Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GPT-5.2B · Grok 4.20

  1. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 82.1%B 60.9%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 21.2
    CharXiv: GPT-5.2 scored 82.1%; Grok 4.20 scored 60.9%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

  2. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 79.5%B 75.2%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 4.3
    MMMU-Pro: GPT-5.2 scored 79.5%; Grok 4.20 scored 75.2%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 55.6%B 51.8%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 3.8
    SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.2 scored 55.6%; Grok 4.20 scored 51.8%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

  4. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 80%B 76.7%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 3.3
    SWE-bench Verified: GPT-5.2 scored 80%; Grok 4.20 scored 76.7%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

  5. ARC-AGI-2

    Reasoning
    Source ↗
    A 52.9%B 53.3%
    Winner: Grok 4.20Δ 0.4
    ARC-AGI-2: GPT-5.2 scored 52.9%; Grok 4.20 scored 53.3%. Grok 4.20 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-5.2Grok 4.20Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 outputGrok 4.20$2 input / $6 outputGrok 4.20 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.273 tok/sGrok 4.20233 tok/sGrok 4.20 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.2130.34 sGrok 4.2010.33 sGrok 4.20 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.2400KGrok 4.202MGrok 4.20 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4.20Result
BrowseCompSource 65.8%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 47.3%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 84.8%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 46.54%38.36%GPT-5.2 leads
JobBenchSource 34.3%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —47.1%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —62.8%Not comparable
CodingGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4.20Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80%76.7%GPT-5.2 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 55.6%51.8%GPT-5.2 leads
Vibe Code BenchSource 53.50%4.06%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 52.1%—Not comparable
LiveCodeBench ProSource —74.2%Not comparable
ReasoningGrok 4.20 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4.20Result
ARC-AGI-2Source 52.9%53.3%Grok 4.20 leads
AA-LCRSource 72.7%—Not comparable
CritPtSource 11.6%—Not comparable
ARC-AGI-3Source —0.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4.20Result
GPQASource 92.4%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.2%—Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 90.3%—Not comparable
AA-HLESource 35.4%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -1.0%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.8%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 79.7%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource —88.5%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource —31.6%Not comparable
HealthBench HardSource —20.3%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source —50.2%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4.20Result
AA AIME 2025Source 99.0%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 40.700%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 18.800%—Not comparable
MultimodalGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4.20Result
MMMU-ProSource 79.5%75.2%GPT-5.2 leads
MathVisionSource 83.0%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.1%60.9%GPT-5.2 leads
V*Source 75.9%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12191252Grok 4.20 leads
ERQASource —54.1%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource —57.4%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source —65.8%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Grok 4.20Result
AA-IFBenchSource 75.4%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, GPT-5.2 or Grok 4.20?

GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 57.62 to 53.88. The biggest single separator in this matchup is CharXiv, where the scores are 82.1% and 60.9%.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.2 or Grok 4.20?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 67.1. Inside this category, Vibe Code Bench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, GPT-5.2 or Grok 4.20?

Grok 4.20 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 53.3 versus 52.9. Inside this category, ARC-AGI-2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.2 or Grok 4.20?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55.7 versus 47.1. Inside this category, Gert Labs is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, GPT-5.2 or Grok 4.20?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 70.1. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

OpenAI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 28, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.