Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs GPT-5.2 Codex
GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 45.4 to 37.4.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2025-12-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 400K |
| Max output | — | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.75 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $14 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 5 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.2 Codex leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.4 (#181), GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.4 (#66)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 72.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1339 |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 66.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 47.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,300 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —, GPT-5.2 Codex: 40.7 (#20)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 66.5% |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 21.2 (#203), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 50.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1324 | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.1 | — |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.8 (#192), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 37.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 58.1% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1309 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.6 (#185), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 72% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1305 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 30.6 (#103), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1100 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.2 (#156), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1323 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1339 | — |
| LMArena French | 1346 | — |
| LMArena German | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1302 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1325 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1328 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1313 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.6 (#158), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 78.3% | — |
| IFEval | 82.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#155), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1321 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.9 (#172), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1330 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | — |
| WildBench | 79% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1307 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than GPT-5.2 Codex?
GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or GPT-5.2 Codex better for coding?
GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.4 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GPT-5.2 Codex share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Codex has 5.