Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
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 on 16/17 benchmarks
GPT-5.2 wins 16 of 17 shared benchmarks. Leads in reasoning · knowledge · math.
Category leads
reasoning·GPT-5.2knowledge·GPT-5.2math·GPT-5.2coding·GPT-5.2
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
GPT-5.2
#76 by perf·no signal
Claude Sonnet 4.5
#132 by perf·no signal
Best value
GPT-5.2
1.5x better value than Claude Sonnet 4.5
GPT-5.2
6.9 pts/$
$7.88/M
Claude Sonnet 4.5
4.7 pts/$
$9.00/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
17 benchmarks · 2 models
GPT-5.2Claude Sonnet 4.5
ARC-AGI
GPT-5.2 leads by +22.5
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
GPT-5.2
86.2
Claude Sonnet 4.5
63.7
ARC-AGI-2
GPT-5.2 leads by +39.3
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
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.
GPT-5.2
49.0
Claude Sonnet 4.5
12.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5.2 leads by +25.5
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
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.
GPT-5.2
18.8
Claude Sonnet 4.5
4.2
GPQA diamond
GPT-5.2 leads by +12.1
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
GPT-5.2
88.5
Claude Sonnet 4.5
76.4
GSO-Bench
GPT-5.2 leads by +12.7
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
GPT-5.2
27.4
Claude Sonnet 4.5
14.7
HLE
GPT-5.2 leads by +14.8
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%.
GPT-5.2
24.2
Claude Sonnet 4.5
9.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5.2 leads by +18.3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
GPT-5.2
96.1
Claude Sonnet 4.5
77.8
PostTrainBench
GPT-5.2 leads by +11.4
GPT-5.2
21.4
Claude Sonnet 4.5
9.9
SimpleBench
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +10.2
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
GPT-5.2
35.0
Claude Sonnet 4.5
45.2
SimpleQA Verified
GPT-5.2 leads by +15.3
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
GPT-5.2
38.9
Claude Sonnet 4.5
23.6
SWE-Bench verified
GPT-5.2 leads by +2.5
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.
GPT-5.2
73.8
Claude Sonnet 4.5
71.3
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only)
GPT-5.2 leads by +1.2
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.
GPT-5.2
71.8
Claude Sonnet 4.5
70.6
Terminal Bench
GPT-5.2 leads by +18.4
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.
GPT-5.2
64.9
Claude Sonnet 4.5
46.5
VPCT
GPT-5.2 leads by +66.3
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
GPT-5.2
76.0
Claude Sonnet 4.5
9.7
WeirdML
GPT-5.2 leads by +24.5
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
GPT-5.2
72.2
Claude Sonnet 4.5
47.7
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Claude 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. | 86.2 | 63.7 |
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. | 52.9 | 13.6 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 49.0 | 12.0 |
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. | 40.7 | 15.2 |
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. | 18.8 | 4.2 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 88.5 | 76.4 |
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. | 27.4 | 14.7 |
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%. | 24.2 | 9.4 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 96.1 | 77.8 |
PostTrainBench | 21.4 | 9.9 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 35.0 | 45.2 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 38.9 | 23.6 |
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. | 73.8 | 71.3 |
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. | 71.8 | 70.6 |
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. | 64.9 | 46.5 |
VPCT VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations. | 76.0 | 9.7 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 72.2 | 47.7 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $1.75 | $14.00 | 400K tokens (~200 books) | $48.13 | |
| $3.00 | $15.00 | 1.0M tokens (~500 books) | $60.00 |