Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.2 vs o3-mini

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 7 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

OpenAI
58.43/100
Margin
11.0pts
← winning
OpenAI
47.41/100
2 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated); o3-mini #136 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.2 and o3-mini share 7 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 21 results are unique to GPT-5.2; 3 to o3-mini.

Updated July 24, 2026
Shared results
7
GPT-5.2 only
21
o3-mini only
3
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o3-mini only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 7 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 2 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, 58.43 to 47.41. 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 coding, where it averages 70.6 against 49.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 80% to 49.3%.

GPT-5.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens for o3-mini. That is roughly 3.2x on output cost alone. GPT-5.2 gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 200K for o3-mini.

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 o3-mini
CategoryGPT-5.2Δo3-mini
CodingGPT-5.270.6Margin 21.3o3-mini49.3
KnowledgeGPT-5.292.4Margin 15.2o3-mini77.2
AgenticGPT-5.255.7MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
ReasoningGPT-5.252.9MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
MathGPT-5.235.2MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
MultimodalGPT-5.280.4MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
Inst. FollowingGPT-5.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapo3-mini93.9

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GPT-5.2B · o3-mini
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 80%B 49.3%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 30.7
    SWE-bench Verified: GPT-5.2 scored 80%; o3-mini scored 49.3%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  2. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 92.4%B 77.2%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 15.2
    GPQA: GPT-5.2 scored 92.4%; o3-mini scored 77.2%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-5.2o3-miniComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 outputo3-mini$1.1 input / $4.4 outputo3-mini has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.273 tok/so3-mini160 tok/so3-mini has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.2130.34 so3-mini7.12 so3-mini reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.2400Ko3-mini200KGPT-5.2 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGPT-5.2o3-miniResult
BrowseCompSource 65.8%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 47.3%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 84.8%28.7%GPT-5.2 leads
Gert LabsSource 46.54%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 34.3%Not comparable
CodingGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2o3-miniResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80%49.3%GPT-5.2 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 55.6%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 53.50%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 52.1%39.9%GPT-5.2 leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-5.2o3-miniResult
ARC-AGI-2Source 52.9%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 72.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource 11.6%Not comparable
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2o3-miniResult
GPQASource 92.4%77.2%GPT-5.2 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.2%19.0%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 90.3%74.8%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-HLESource 35.4%8.7%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -1.0%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.8%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 79.7%Not comparable
MMLUSource 86.9%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGPT-5.2o3-miniResult
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
AIME 2024Source 87.3%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-5.2o3-miniResult
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 1224Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.2o3-miniResult
AA-IFBenchSource 75.4%Not comparable
IFEvalSource 93.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, GPT-5.2 or o3-mini?

GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.43 to 47.41. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 80% and 49.3%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.2 or o3-mini?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 77.2. Inside this category, AA-HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.2 or o3-mini?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 49.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 24, 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.