Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs GPT-5.2 Codex
GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.2 Codex in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 45.5 to 28.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SWE-bench Verified (bash only): 13.5% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 72.8% for GPT-5.2 Codex.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 42.6 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2025-12-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 400K |
| Max output | — | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.75 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $14 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 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 (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.5 (#71)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | 72.8% |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1339 |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 66.3% |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,300 |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.2 Codex leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), GPT-5.2 Codex: 41.0 (#22)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 66.5% |
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1352 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | — |
| LMArena French | 1391 | — |
| LMArena German | 1353 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than GPT-5.2 Codex?
GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or GPT-5.2 Codex better for coding?
GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.5 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and GPT-5.2 Codex share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Codex has 5.