Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) vs GPT-5.2-Codex

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs 23.3x less per output token than GPT-5.2-Codex ($0.60 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
GPT-5.2-CodexOpenAI
Coding
45.4
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$14.00
vs $0.60 vs $14.00 per 1M output tokens. GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) is 23.3x cheaper.

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or GPT-5.2-Codex: which to pick

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) for output tokens 23.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $14.00 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) has results on Aider polyglot, WeirdML and LMArena Text: coding; GPT-5.2-Codex on SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Multilingual and LMArena WebDev. Compare them on price and context instead.

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-mini (2024-07-18) not benchmarked, GPT-5.2-Codex 45.4 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) $0.60 against GPT-5.2-Codex $14.00 per million output tokens, 23.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) takes 128K tokens, GPT-5.2-Codex 400K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index15 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)GPT-5.2-CodexLeader
Aider polyglot3.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
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
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
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured37.1%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured66.5%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
WeirdML11.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1299.9Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena Text: coding1290Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1291Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 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 28 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)GPT-5.2-CodexLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured28.5Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)GPT-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 measured1089Only 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 TelecomNot measured92.1%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
BALROG17.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)GPT-5.2-CodexLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured89.9%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured35.7%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)37.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
SimpleBench10.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Chess puzzles3.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Mystery game puzzles12.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
VPCT34.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: expert1234Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1278Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)GPT-5.2-CodexLeader
OTIS Mock AIME6.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 30.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
MATH level 552.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: math1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1271Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)GPT-5.2-CodexLeader
SimpleQA Verified8.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
MMLU76.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
GeoBench64.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: science1286Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1282Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1305Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1265Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23 boards measured
General benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)GPT-5.2-CodexLeader
IFBenchNot measured77.6%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured82.3%Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)67.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text1286Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1258Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1268Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Vision1066Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: English1301Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: non-English1266Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1265Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: German1272Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1216Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Korean1195Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: French1297Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1276Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Russian1275Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Polish1244Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1285Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1289Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1282Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1253Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Vision: English1072Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1033Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 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-mini (2024-07-18)$0.0004Fits in one request
GPT-5.2-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.0093Fits in one request
GPT-5.2-Codex$0.130Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.036Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.2-Codex$0.490Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 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-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)OpenAI GPT-5.2-Codex
MakerOpenAIOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 18, 2024January 14, 2026
Context window128K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$1.75
Output $/Mtok$0.60$14.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked45.4
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.43
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) better than GPT-5.2-Codex for coding?

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) for output tokens 23.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $14.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or GPT-5.2-Codex?

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 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, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or GPT-5.2-Codex?

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

Has any benchmark tested both GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and GPT-5.2-Codex?

No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) has results on Aider polyglot, WeirdML and LMArena Text: coding; GPT-5.2-Codex on SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Multilingual and LMArena WebDev. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next