Compare · ModelsLive · 3 picked · head to head

Claude Opus 4.5 vs GPT-5.2 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5

Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.

Winner summary

GPT-5.2 wins 14 of 22 shared benchmarks. Leads in reasoning · knowledge · math.

Category leads
reasoning·GPT-5.2knowledge·GPT-5.2math·GPT-5.2coding·GPT-5.2agentic·GPT-5.2arena·Claude Opus 4.5
Hype vs Reality
Claude Opus 4.5
#113 by perf·no signal
QUIET
GPT-5.2
#76 by perf·no signal
QUIET
Claude Sonnet 4.5
#132 by perf·no signal
QUIET
Best value
1.5x better value than Claude Sonnet 4.5
Claude Opus 4.5
3.0 pts/$
$15.00/M
GPT-5.2
6.9 pts/$
$7.88/M
Claude Sonnet 4.5
4.7 pts/$
$9.00/M
Vendor risk
Anthropic logo
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Medium risk
OpenAI logo
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Medium risk
Anthropic logo
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Medium risk
Head to head
Claude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Claude Sonnet 4.5
ARC-AGI
GPT-5.2 leads by +6.2
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Claude Opus 4.5
80.0
GPT-5.2
86.2
Claude Sonnet 4.5
63.7
ARC-AGI-2
GPT-5.2 leads by +15.3
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Claude Opus 4.5
37.6
GPT-5.2
52.9
Claude Sonnet 4.5
13.6
Chess Puzzles
GPT-5.2 leads by +37.0
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Claude Opus 4.5
12.0
GPT-5.2
49.0
Claude Sonnet 4.5
12.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5.2 leads by +20.0
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.5
20.7
GPT-5.2
40.7
Claude Sonnet 4.5
15.2
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
GPT-5.2 leads by +14.6
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.5
4.2
GPT-5.2
18.8
Claude Sonnet 4.5
4.2
GPQA diamond
GPT-5.2 leads by +7.1
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Claude Opus 4.5
81.4
GPT-5.2
88.5
Claude Sonnet 4.5
76.4
GSO-Bench
GPT-5.2 leads by +0.9
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
Claude Opus 4.5
26.5
GPT-5.2
27.4
Claude Sonnet 4.5
14.7
HLE
GPT-5.2 leads by +2.7
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
Claude Opus 4.5
21.4
GPT-5.2
24.2
Claude Sonnet 4.5
9.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5.2 leads by +10.0
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Claude Opus 4.5
86.1
GPT-5.2
96.1
Claude Sonnet 4.5
77.8
PostTrainBench
GPT-5.2 leads by +4.1
Claude Opus 4.5
17.3
GPT-5.2
21.4
Claude Sonnet 4.5
9.9
SimpleBench
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +9.2
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Claude Opus 4.5
54.4
GPT-5.2
35.0
Claude Sonnet 4.5
45.2
SimpleQA Verified
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +2.9
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Claude Opus 4.5
41.8
GPT-5.2
38.9
Claude Sonnet 4.5
23.6
SWE-Bench verified
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +2.9
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
Claude Opus 4.5
76.7
GPT-5.2
73.8
Claude Sonnet 4.5
71.3
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only)
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +2.6
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only) · a curated subset of SWE-bench where models fix real Python repository bugs using only bash commands, no agent frameworks.
Claude Opus 4.5
74.4
GPT-5.2
71.8
Claude Sonnet 4.5
70.6
Terminal Bench
GPT-5.2 leads by +1.8
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
Claude Opus 4.5
63.1
GPT-5.2
64.9
Claude Sonnet 4.5
46.5
VPCT
GPT-5.2 leads by +66.0
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
Claude Opus 4.5
10.0
GPT-5.2
76.0
Claude Sonnet 4.5
9.7
WeirdML
GPT-5.2 leads by +8.5
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Claude Opus 4.5
63.7
GPT-5.2
72.2
Claude Sonnet 4.5
47.7
APEX-Agents
GPT-5.2 leads by +15.9
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Claude Opus 4.5
18.4
GPT-5.2
34.3
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +62.1
Claude Opus 4.5
1465.2
GPT-5.2
1403.1
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +28.2
Claude Opus 4.5
1467.7
GPT-5.2
1439.5
Cybench
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +22.0
Cybench · evaluates AI on real Capture-The-Flag cybersecurity challenges, testing vulnerability analysis, exploitation, and security reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.5
82.0
Claude Sonnet 4.5
60.0
OSWorld
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +3.4
OSWorld · tests AI agents on real-world computer tasks across operating systems, including web browsing, file management, and application use.
Claude Opus 4.5
66.3
Claude Sonnet 4.5
62.9
Full benchmark table
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-5.2Claude Sonnet 4.5
ARC-AGI
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
80.086.263.7
ARC-AGI-2
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
37.652.913.6
Chess Puzzles
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
12.049.012.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
20.740.715.2
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
4.218.84.2
GPQA diamond
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
81.488.576.4
GSO-Bench
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
26.527.414.7
HLE
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
21.424.29.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
86.196.177.8
PostTrainBench
17.321.49.9
SimpleBench
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
54.435.045.2
SimpleQA Verified
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
41.838.923.6
SWE-Bench verified
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
76.773.871.3
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only)
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only) · a curated subset of SWE-bench where models fix real Python repository bugs using only bash commands, no agent frameworks.
74.471.870.6
Terminal Bench
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
63.164.946.5
VPCT
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
10.076.09.7
WeirdML
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
63.772.247.7
APEX-Agents
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
18.434.3
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
1465.21403.1
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
1467.71439.5
Cybench
Cybench · evaluates AI on real Capture-The-Flag cybersecurity challenges, testing vulnerability analysis, exploitation, and security reasoning.
82.060.0
OSWorld
OSWorld · tests AI agents on real-world computer tasks across operating systems, including web browsing, file management, and application use.
66.362.9
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
ModelInputOutputContextProjected $/mo
Anthropic logoClaude Opus 4.5$5.00$25.00200K tokens (~100 books)$100.00
OpenAI logoGPT-5.2$1.75$14.00400K tokens (~200 books)$48.13
Anthropic logoClaude Sonnet 4.5$3.00$15.001.0M tokens (~500 books)$60.00