Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.2-Codex vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent

Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-5.2-CodexOpenAI
Coding
45.4
Overall
28.5
Output $/M
$14.00
Grok 4.20 Multi-AgentxAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.50
vs $14.00 vs $2.50 per 1M output tokens. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is 5.6x cheaper.

Decision reading

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has the edge where output tokens cost 5.6x less, and where the context window is larger, 2M against 400K tokens.

Shared results
0
GPT-5.2-Codex only
22
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent only
0
Like-for-like categories
0 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-5.2-Codex 45.4 from 3 benchmarks, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent not benchmarked.
Widest category
No category has a result for both models.
Widest single gap
No benchmark has a result for both models.
Output price
GPT-5.2-Codex $14.00 against Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent $2.50 per million output tokens, 5.6x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.2-Codex takes 400K tokens, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent 2M.

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.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev1339Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)37.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)37.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench66.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1299.9Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: React1329Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1348Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
AA Intelligence Index28.5Not measuredOnly 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 index6 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1051Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps993Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1089Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1176Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1142Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
τ²-Bench Telecom92.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)35.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
Neither model has a result on 13 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
Neither model has a result on 17 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
IFBench77.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentLeader
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-5.2-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent$0.0025Fits in one request

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.130Fits in one request
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent$0.070Fits in one request

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.490Fits in one request
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent$0.275Fits in one request

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent 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-5.2-Codex and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.2-CodexSpaceXAI Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
MakerOpenAIxAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedJanuary 14, 2026March 31, 2026
Context window400K2M
Input $/Mtok$1.75$1.25
Output $/Mtok$14.00$2.50
Coding index45.4Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.43Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.2-Codex better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent for coding?

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has the edge where output tokens cost 5.6x less, and where the context window is larger, 2M against 400K tokens.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2-Codex or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?

GPT-5.2-Codex costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs $1.25 and $2.50. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2-Codex or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent, with 2M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.2-Codex vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent comparison based on?

0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5.2-Codex's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next