Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.2-Codex vs Qwen3.5-9B

Updated October 21, 2026. 8 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
8
Qwen3.5-9BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
13.3
Output $/M
$0.15
0
vs boards won of 8 shared

Decision reading

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-9B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Qwen3.5-9B has the edge where output tokens cost 93.3x less.

Shared results
8
GPT-5.2-Codex only
14
Qwen3.5-9B only
7
Like-for-like categories
5 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, Qwen3.5-9B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 35.1 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Terminal-Bench: GPT-5.2-Codex 66.5% against Qwen3.5-9B 9.2%, 57.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.2-Codex $14.00 against Qwen3.5-9B $0.15 per million output tokens, 93.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.2-Codex takes 400K tokens, Qwen3.5-9B 262K.

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-5.2-CodexBarsQwen3.5-9BTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General20
All shared boards80
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
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
AA Coding IndexNot measured23.5Only Qwen3.5-9B 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
SciCodeNot measured29.5%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)37.1%24.2%GPT-5.2-Codex
Terminal-Bench66.5%9.2%GPT-5.2-Codex
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 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Intelligence Index28.513.3GPT-5.2-Codex
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured139.3Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
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 apps1090Not 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%86.8%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 index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.9%80.6%GPT-5.2-Codex
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)35.7%14.9%GPT-5.2-Codex
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured79.0%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured61.7%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
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 Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
IFBench77.6%66.7%GPT-5.2-Codex
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.3%70.0%GPT-5.2-Codex
DTBenchNot measured71.2%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
LMCANot measured24.5%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 42 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 Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9BLeader
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
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.130Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0054Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.490Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.021Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B 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 Qwen3.5-9B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.2-CodexQwen3.5-9B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJanuary 14, 2026March 10, 2026
Context window400K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.75$0.10
Output $/Mtok$14.00$0.15
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 Qwen3.5-9B for coding?

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-9B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Qwen3.5-9B has the edge where output tokens cost 93.3x less.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2-Codex or Qwen3.5-9B?

GPT-5.2-Codex costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.10 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2-Codex or Qwen3.5-9B?

GPT-5.2-Codex, with 400K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.2-Codex vs Qwen3.5-9B comparison based on?

8 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 Qwen3.5-9B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next