Compare AI models
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins · base tier | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $1.75 | $1.00 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $14.00 | $2.00 |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | $0.175 | $0.20 |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.875OpenAI | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $7.00OpenAI | — |
| $1,050OpenAI list price | $300SpaceXSI list price | |
| Benchmarks | ||
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 80% | 70.8% |
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 38% | — |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 65.8% | — |
ARC-AGI-2Abstract reasoning — Puzzle-style tests of abstract reasoning and pattern-finding — the kind of thing people find easy but AIs often struggle with. Higher is better. | 52.9% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 92.4% | — |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 47.3% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | OpenAI | SpaceXSI |
| Release date | Dec 11 2025 | Aug 28 2025 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
GPT-5.2vsClaude Haiku 5.5Grok Code Fast 1vsClaude Haiku 5.5GPT-5.2vsGemini 4 ArgonGrok Code Fast 1vsGemini 4 ArgonGPT-5.2vsMuse WonderGrok Code Fast 1vsMuse WonderGPT-5.2vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGrok Code Fast 1vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGPT-5.2vsMistral Large 4Grok Code Fast 1vsMistral Large 4GPT-5.2vsKimi K3Grok Code Fast 1vsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
GPT-5.2 leads Grok Code Fast 1 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (SWE-Bench Verified). Grok Code Fast 1 is cheaper on both input and output: $1.00 vs $1.75 per million input tokens, and $2.00 vs $14.00 per million output tokens. Figures are base-tier rates. Grok Code Fast 1 shipped 105 days before GPT-5.2, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On SWE-Bench Verified, GPT-5.2 leads at 80% vs Grok Code Fast 1 at 70.8%.