Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
GPT-5.2 vs Kimi K2 Thinking
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GPT-5.2 wins on 13/13 benchmarks
GPT-5.2 wins 13 of 13 shared benchmarks. Leads in agentic · knowledge · general.
Category leads
agentic·GPT-5.2knowledge·GPT-5.2general·GPT-5.2math·GPT-5.2coding·GPT-5.2
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
GPT-5.2
#147 by perf·#4 by attention
Kimi K2 Thinking
#103 by perf·#17 by attention
Best value
Kimi K2 Thinking
5.7x better value than GPT-5.2
GPT-5.2
6.0 pts/$
$7.88/M
Kimi K2 Thinking
34.0 pts/$
$1.55/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Moonshot AI
$18.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
13 benchmarks · 2 models
GPT-5.2Kimi K2 Thinking
APEX-Agents
GPT-5.2 leads by +30.3
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
GPT-5.2
34.3
Kimi K2 Thinking
4.0
Chess Puzzles
GPT-5.2 leads by +30.5
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
GPT-5.2
46.3
Kimi K2 Thinking
15.8
Cl Bench
GPT-5.2 leads by +0.6
GPT-5.2
18.2
Kimi K2 Thinking
17.6
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5.2 leads by +3.2
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
Kimi K2 Thinking
37.5
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
GPT-5.2 leads by +18.8
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
Kimi K2 Thinking
0.0
GPQA diamond
GPT-5.2 leads by +9.6
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
Kimi K2 Thinking
79.0
Metr Time Horizons
GPT-5.2 leads by +16.1
GPT-5.2
75.3
Kimi K2 Thinking
59.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5.2 leads by +13.1
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
GPT-5.2
96.1
Kimi K2 Thinking
83.0
PostTrainBench
GPT-5.2 leads by +14.1
GPT-5.2
21.4
Kimi K2 Thinking
7.3
SimpleQA Verified
GPT-5.2 leads by +5.5
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
GPT-5.2
37.1
Kimi K2 Thinking
31.6
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only)
GPT-5.2 leads by +8.4
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
Kimi K2 Thinking
63.4
Terminal Bench
GPT-5.2 leads by +29.2
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
Kimi K2 Thinking
35.7
WeirdML
GPT-5.2 leads by +29.4
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
GPT-5.2
72.2
Kimi K2 Thinking
42.8
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Kimi K2 Thinking |
|---|---|---|
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 34.3 | 4.0 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 46.3 | 15.8 |
Cl Bench | 18.2 | 17.6 |
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 | 37.5 |
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 | 0.0 |
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 | 79.0 |
Metr Time Horizons | 75.3 | 59.2 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 96.1 | 83.0 |
PostTrainBench | 21.4 | 7.3 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 37.1 | 31.6 |
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 | 63.4 |
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 | 35.7 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 72.2 | 42.8 |
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 | |
| $0.60 | $2.50 | 262K tokens (~131 books) | $10.75 |