LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) vs GPT-5.2

Updated October 21, 2026. 53 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace GPT-4o (2024-08-06) Replace GPT-5.2
GPT-4o (2024-08-06)OpenAI
Coding
23.1
Overall
7.7
Output $/M
$10.00
0
GPT-5.2OpenAI
Coding
58.9
Overall
30.4
Output $/M
$14.00
53
vs boards won of 53 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5.2 for coding: it scores 58.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 23.1 for GPT-4o (2024-08-06).

Pick GPT-4o (2024-08-06) when output tokens cost 1.4x less.

Model AGPT-4o (2024-08-06)OpenAI23.1/1001 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGPT-5.2OpenAI58.9/1002 independent benchmarks$1.91 per solved task
Shared results
53
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) only
5
GPT-5.2 only
58
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 23.1 from 1 benchmark, GPT-5.2 58.9 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 55.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 6.4% against GPT-5.2 96.1%, 89.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) $10.00 against GPT-5.2 $14.00 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) takes 128K tokens, GPT-5.2 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
CategoryGPT-4o (2024-08-06)BarsGPT-5.2Ties
Coding04
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning09
Math06
Knowledge011
General021
All shared boards053
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
Aider polyglot23.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured72.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SWE-bench Lite21.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured66.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1417Only GPT-5.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured85.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured75.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured53.5%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)31.7%89.4%GPT-5.2
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)8.3%47.0%GPT-5.2
Terminal-BenchNot measured64.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured27.5%Only GPT-5.2 measured
WeirdMLNot measured72.2%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1293.5Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: coding12831442GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: software and IT12781434GPT-5.2
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1427Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
AA Intelligence Index7.730.4GPT-5.2
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured153.7Only GPT-5.2 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1086Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1043Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1094Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1064Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1142Only GPT-5.2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom28.9%84.8%GPT-5.2
METR time horizonsNot measured75.3%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Remote Labor IndexNot measured2.5%Only GPT-5.2 measured
GDPvalNot measured49.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured41.1%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$3,591Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index09
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured91.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)64.0%86.7%GPT-5.2
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)52.1%90.3%GPT-5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)2.3%37.7%GPT-5.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)49.2%91.4%GPT-5.2
ARC-AGINot measured86.2%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured52.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleBench17.8%45.8%GPT-5.2
Chess puzzles6.0%48.0%GPT-5.2
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured23.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
EBR-benchNot measured23.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
VPCTNot measured84.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12641428GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: expert12411445GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12771431GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1265Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1276Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
AIME14.0%96.9%GPT-5.2
MATH 500 (Vals AI)75.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.7%94.0%GPT-5.2
AA Math IndexNot measured99.0Only GPT-5.2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured99.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
OTIS Mock AIME6.4%96.1%GPT-5.2
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 30.4%67.4%GPT-5.2
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured31.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ProofBenchNot measured15.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MATH level 553.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: math12851440GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: mathematical work12831442GPT-5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index011
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
MMLU Pro74.1%86.2%GPT-5.2
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.1%82.8%GPT-5.2
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured66.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)39.4%65.9%GPT-5.2
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.1%75.8%GPT-5.2
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.0%67.1%GPT-5.2
MedQA (Vals AI)88.2%94.1%GPT-5.2
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured49.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured87.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleQA Verified26.0%37.1%GPT-5.2
MMLU84.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: science12741425GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12521425GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: legal and government12751427GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: business and finance12321414GPT-5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1196Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1190Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1196Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1202Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1079Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1171Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1137Only GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1153Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index021
General benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured49.3%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured84.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
IFBench36.0%75.4%GPT-5.2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)41.0%82.7%GPT-5.2
DTBenchNot measured90.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMCANot measured43.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
CL-benchNot measured18.2%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured38.3%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text12831416GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: instruction following12671409GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: creative writing12741376GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision10651246GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: English12971422GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: non-English12621405GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: Chinese12541447GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: German12571444GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: Japanese12341420GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: Korean12181374GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: French12631454GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: Spanish12691413GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: Russian12721415GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1426Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn12791419GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: longer queries12831413GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: writing and language12901392GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12671378GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision: English10721243GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision: Chinese10091305GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1257Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1227Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1267Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1232Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1225Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1405Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)GPT-5.2Leader
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

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.0075Fits in one request
GPT-5.2$0.0088Fits in one request

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.155Fits in one request
GPT-5.2$0.130Fits in one request

GPT-5.2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.600Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.2$0.490Fits in one request

GPT-5.2 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 GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and GPT-5.2
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-08-06)OpenAI GPT-5.2
MakerOpenAIOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 6, 2024December 10, 2025
Context window128K400K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$1.75
Output $/Mtok$10.00$14.00
Coding index23.158.9
Independent measurements behind it12
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.91
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o (2024-08-06) better than GPT-5.2 for coding?

Pick GPT-5.2 for coding: it scores 58.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 23.1 for GPT-4o (2024-08-06). Pick GPT-4o (2024-08-06) when output tokens cost 1.4x less.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or GPT-5.2?

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 costs $1.75 and $14.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2, with 400K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o (2024-08-06) vs GPT-5.2 comparison based on?

53 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4o (2024-08-06)'s coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-5.2's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next