Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.2 vs Inkling

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 6 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

OpenAI
58.36/100
Margin
10.6pts
winning →
Thinking Machines Lab
69/100
3 category wins2 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: GPT-5.2 #23; Inkling #17

BenchAlign evidence: GPT-5.2 estimated; Inkling not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.2 and Inkling share 6 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 23 results are unique to GPT-5.2; 10 to Inkling.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
6
GPT-5.2 only
23
Inkling only
10
Comparable categories
5 / 8

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

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 6 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 5 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 provisional aggregate, 75 to 69. 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 51.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is BrowseComp, 65.8% to 77.1%. Inkling does hit back in mathematics, 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 $1.87 input / $4.68 output per 1M tokens for Inkling. That is roughly 3.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.2 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Inkling 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. Inkling gives you the larger context window at 1M, 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 Inkling
CategoryGPT-5.2ΔInkling
MathGPT-5.235.2Margin 61.9Inkling97.1
KnowledgeGPT-5.292.4Margin 40.7Inkling51.7
AgenticGPT-5.255.7Margin 13.7Inkling69.4
MultimodalGPT-5.280.4Margin 3.9Inkling76.5
CodingGPT-5.270.6Margin 2.0Inkling68.6
ReasoningGPT-5.252.9MarginNo overlapInklingNot measured
Inst. FollowingGPT-5.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapInkling79.8

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GPT-5.2B · Inkling
  1. BrowseComp

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 65.8%B 77.1%
    Winner: InklingΔ 11.3
    BrowseComp: GPT-5.2 scored 65.8%; Inkling scored 77.1%. Inkling wins this benchmark.
  2. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 79.5%B 73.5%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 6
    MMMU-Pro: GPT-5.2 scored 79.5%; Inkling scored 73.5%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  3. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 92.4%B 87.9%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 4.5
    GPQA: GPT-5.2 scored 92.4%; Inkling scored 87.9%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  4. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 80%B 77.6%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 2.4
    SWE-bench Verified: GPT-5.2 scored 80%; Inkling scored 77.6%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  5. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 55.6%B 54.3%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 1.3
    SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.2 scored 55.6%; Inkling scored 54.3%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-5.2InklingComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 outputInkling$1.87 input / $4.68 outputInkling has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.273 tok/sInklingNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.2130.34 sInklingNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.2400KInkling1MInkling lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticInkling wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2InklingResult
BrowseCompSource 65.8%77.1%Inkling leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 47.3%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 84.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 46.54%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 34.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 63.8%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 74.1%Not comparable
Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource 1258Not comparable
CodingGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2InklingResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80%77.6%GPT-5.2 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 55.6%54.3%GPT-5.2 leads
Vibe Code BenchSource 53.50%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 47.0%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 52.1%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 63.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-5.2InklingResult
ARC-AGI-2Source 52.9%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 72.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource 11.6%Not comparable
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2InklingResult
GPQASource 92.4%87.9%GPT-5.2 leads
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 87.9%Not comparable
HLESource 46%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 30%Not comparable
MathInkling wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2InklingResult
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
AIME26Source 97.1%Not comparable
MultimodalGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2InklingResult
MMMU-ProSource 79.5%73.5%GPT-5.2 leads
MathVisionSource 83.0%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.1%82%GPT-5.2 leads
V*Source 75.9%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1229Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 78.1%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.2InklingResult
AA-IFBenchSource 75.4%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 79.8%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, GPT-5.2 or Inkling?

GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 75 to 69. The biggest single separator in this matchup is BrowseComp, where the scores are 65.8% and 77.1%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.2 or Inkling?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 51.7. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.2 or Inkling?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 68.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, GPT-5.2 or Inkling?

Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 35.2. GPT-5.2 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

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

Inkling has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 69.4 versus 55.7. Inside this category, BrowseComp is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

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

GPT-5.2 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 76.5. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 15, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.