Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.2 vs Granite 4.2 8B

GPT-5.2 leads Granite 4.2 8B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 30.4 to 11.1, and Granite 4.2 8B costs 70.0x less per output token ($0.20 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 24 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.2OpenAI
Coding
55.9
Overall
60.7
Output $/M
$14.00
24
Granite 4.2 8BIBM Granite
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
0
vs boards won of 24 shared

GPT-5.2 or Granite 4.2 8B: which to pick

Only GPT-5.2 has a coding score, 55.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Granite 4.2 8B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Granite 4.2 8B for output tokens 70.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $14.00 per million).

Shared results
24
GPT-5.2 only
90
Granite 4.2 8B only
3
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
GPT-5.2 55.9 from 3 benchmarks, Granite 4.2 8B not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 19.6 points apart on average over 12 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): GPT-5.2 82.7% against Granite 4.2 8B 45.0%, 37.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.2 $14.00 against Granite 4.2 8B $0.20 per million output tokens, 70.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.2 takes 400K tokens, Granite 4.2 8B 131K.

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-5.2BarsGranite 4.2 8BTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning50
Knowledge40
General120
All shared boards240
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual66.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena WebDev1417Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured22.4Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)75.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)53.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)89.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SciCodeNot measured31.5%Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)47.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Terminal-Bench64.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
GSO-Bench27.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
WeirdML72.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
ALE-Bench1293.5Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: coding14421378GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: software and IT14341367GPT-5.2
LMArena WebDev: HTML1427Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
AA Intelligence Index30.411.1GPT-5.2
Epoch Capabilities Index153.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.3Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1086Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1043Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1093Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1060Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1142Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom84.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
METR time horizons75.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Remote Labor Index2.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
GDPval49.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
DeepResearch Bench41.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Vending-Bench 2$3,591Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)55.9%Not measuredOnly 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 index50
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
GPQA Diamond91.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)86.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)90.3%63.1%GPT-5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)37.7%9.7%GPT-5.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)91.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
ARC-AGI86.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
ARC-AGI-252.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleBench45.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Chess puzzles48.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Mystery game puzzles23.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
EBR-bench23.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
VPCT84.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14281327GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: expert14451386GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14311345GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision: diagrams1265Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1276Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark73.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
AIME96.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
AA Math Index99.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)99.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
OTIS Mock AIME96.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 367.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tier 431.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
ProofBench15.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: math1440Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1442Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
MMLU Pro86.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)82.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)65.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)67.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)94.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)87.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleQA Verified37.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: science14251336GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14251336GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: legal and government14271327GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: business and finance14141322GPT-5.2
FACTS Benchmark Suite48.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
Design Arena: websites1195Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: UI components1188Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: game dev1195Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: data viz1202Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: 3D1079Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1170Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: SVG1139Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1152Not measuredOnly 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 index120
General benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)49.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)84.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
IFBench75.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.7%45.0%GPT-5.2
DTBench90.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMCA43.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
CL-bench18.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Furniture assembly38.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text14161319GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: instruction following14091300GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: creative writing13761236GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision1246Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: English14221337GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: non-English14051301GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: Chinese14471367GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: German1444Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1420Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1374Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: French1454Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1413Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14151282GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: Polish1426Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14191301GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: longer queries14131325GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: writing and language13921269GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13781271GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision: English1243Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1305Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1257Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1227Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1267Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1225Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Document1405Not measuredOnly 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-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Granite 4.2 8BLeader
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$0.0088Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B$0.0002Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.2$0.130Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B$0.0046Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.2$0.490Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B$0.018Exceeds the context window

Granite 4.2 8B 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 and Granite 4.2 8B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.2IBM Granite 4.2 8B
MakerOpenAIIBM Granite
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 10, 2025August 31, 2026
Context window400K131K
Input $/Mtok$1.75$0.08
Output $/Mtok$14.00$0.20
Coding index55.9Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$1.91Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.2 better than Granite 4.2 8B for coding?

Only GPT-5.2 has a coding score, 55.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Granite 4.2 8B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Granite 4.2 8B for output tokens 70.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $14.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 or Granite 4.2 8B?

GPT-5.2 costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Granite 4.2 8B costs $0.08 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2 or Granite 4.2 8B?

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

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.2 vs Granite 4.2 8B comparison based on?

24 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.2's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Granite 4.2 8B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next