Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 4B vs GPT-5.2-Codex

GPT-5.2-Codex leads Gemma 3 4B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 28.5 to 4.8, and Gemma 3 4B costs 186.7x less per output token ($0.075 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemma 3 4BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
4.8
Output $/M
$0.075
0
GPT-5.2-CodexOpenAI
Coding
45.4
Overall
28.5
Output $/M
$14.00
7
vs boards won of 7 shared

Gemma 3 4B or GPT-5.2-Codex: which to pick

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 3 4B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 3 4B for output tokens 186.7x cheaper ($0.075 vs $14.00 per million).

Shared results
7
Gemma 3 4B only
32
GPT-5.2-Codex only
15
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemma 3 4B not benchmarked, GPT-5.2-Codex 45.4 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 87.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 3 4B 5.0% against GPT-5.2-Codex 92.1%, 87.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 4B $0.075 against GPT-5.2-Codex $14.00 per million output tokens, 186.7x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 4B takes 131K tokens, GPT-5.2-Codex 400K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemma 3 4BBarsGPT-5.2-CodexTies
Coding01
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
General02
All shared boards07
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured72.8%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured66.3%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1339Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
AA Coding Index2.7Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured88.0%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured72.4%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured37.9%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)11.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%37.1%GPT-5.2-Codex
Terminal-BenchNot measured66.5%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1299.9Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena Text: coding1230Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1269Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1329Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1348Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
AA Intelligence Index4.828.5GPT-5.2-Codex
Epoch Capabilities Index115.9Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1051Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured993Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1090Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1176Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1142Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
τ²-Bench Telecom5.0%92.1%GPT-5.2-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)29.1%89.9%GPT-5.2-Codex
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)5.3%35.7%GPT-5.2-Codex
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)23.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1253Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: expert1223Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1253Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
AA Math Index12.7Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)12.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
OTIS Mock AIME7.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: math1239Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1256Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)41.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: science1306Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1342Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1327Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1311Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
IFBench28.3%77.6%GPT-5.2-Codex
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)6.7%82.3%GPT-5.2-Codex
DTBench50.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMCA2.8%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text1291Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1239Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1270Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: English1300Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: non-English1273Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: German1281Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: Russian1294Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1255Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1273Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1288Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1233Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 4B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGemma 3 4BGPT-5.2-CodexLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Gemma 3 4B$0.0001Fits in one request
GPT-5.2-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request

Gemma 3 4B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 4B$0.0025Fits in one request
GPT-5.2-Codex$0.130Fits in one request

Gemma 3 4B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 4B$0.0097Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.2-Codex$0.490Fits in one request

Gemma 3 4B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Gemma 3 4B and GPT-5.2-Codex
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 4BOpenAI GPT-5.2-Codex
MakerGoogleOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 13, 2025January 14, 2026
Context window131K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.045$1.75
Output $/Mtok$0.075$14.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked45.4
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.43
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 4B better than GPT-5.2-Codex for coding?

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 3 4B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 4B for output tokens 186.7x cheaper ($0.075 vs $14.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 4B or GPT-5.2-Codex?

Gemma 3 4B costs $0.045 per million input tokens and $0.075 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2-Codex costs $1.75 and $14.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 4B or GPT-5.2-Codex?

GPT-5.2-Codex, with 400K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 4B vs GPT-5.2-Codex comparison based on?

7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 3 4B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.2-Codex's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next