Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs GPT-5.2

GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 40 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Google

39.3

Rank #170 Confirmed

GPT-5.2 OpenAI

54.1

Rank #34 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 40 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 2 categories and GPT-5.2 in 8 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.2 leads 50.2 to 18.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 33.3% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 86.2% for GPT-5.2.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 400K.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
ProviderGoogleOpenAI
Noometry Index39.354.1
Released2025-04-172025-12-11
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M400K
Max output66K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$1.75
Output $ / M tokens$2.50$14
Results tracked5467

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), GPT-5.2: 51.6 (#37)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)28.7%72.8%
WeirdML41.9%72.2%
LMArena Coding14241447
ALE-Bench661.881,294
SWE-bench Verified—73.8%
Aider Polyglot55.1%—
LMArena WebDev—1416
SWE-bench Multilingual—66.7%
GSO—27.4%
AlgoTune—2.05

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), GPT-5.2: 40.2 (#24)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
Terminal-Bench17.1%64.9%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard56.2%55.9%
Vending-Bench 2548.843,591
GDPval—49.7%
Remote Labor Index—2.5%
TheAgentCompany41.1%—
τ²-bench Airline—83%
τ²-bench Banking—32.2%
τ²-bench Retail—81.6%
τ²-bench Telecom—89.7%
DeepResearch Bench—41.1%
BALROG33.5%—
LMArena Search—1207
METR Time Horizons—75.3%

Reasoning GPT-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), GPT-5.2: 50.2 (#35)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
ARC-AGI-22.5%52.9%
SimpleBench41.2%45.8%
Kagi LLM Benchmark56.8%73.3%
ARC-AGI-133.3%86.2%
EnigmaEval2.7%10.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts14221445
DTBench76.5%90.9%
LMCA27.5%43.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index143.03153.45
ForecastBench60.660.1
NYT Connections (extended)—83.6%
CritPt1.1%—
Chess Puzzles—49%
EBR-Bench—23%
Mystery Game Puzzles—23%

Math GPT-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), GPT-5.2: 60.0 (#38)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202573.1%96.1%
LMArena Math14151440
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.8%40.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%18.8%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—67.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4—31.7%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—72%
ProofBench—15%
Omni-MATH38.5%—

Knowledge GPT-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), GPT-5.2: 59.3 (#32)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
Humanity's Last Exam12.1%27.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.8%8.4%
LMArena Expert14261445
GPQA Diamond—91.4%
SimpleQA Verified—37.1%
MMLU-Pro63.9%—
Confabulations16.8%—
GPQA (HELM)39%—

Multimodal GPT-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), GPT-5.2: 51.3 (#7)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
LMArena Vision12531268
VPCT46.2%84%
GeoBench76%—
Furniture Assembly—38.3%
LMArena Document—1405
SpatialViz-Bench36.9%—

Multilingual GPT-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), GPT-5.2: 53.4 (#67)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
LMArena Non-English14091425
LMArena Chinese14501460
LMArena French14331455
LMArena German14181448
LMArena Japanese14051420
LMArena Korean13851392
LMArena Russian14151440
LMArena Spanish14211433

Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), GPT-5.2: 74.7 (#89)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following14051417
IFEval89.8%—

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), GPT-5.2: 44.0 (#78)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
LMArena Longer Query14191428
Fiction.LiveBench77.8%—
CL-bench—18.2%

Writing & Preference GPT-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), GPT-5.2: 66.8 (#32)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashGPT-5.2
LMArena Text14171439
LMArena Creative Writing14001401
EQ-Bench Creative Writing11371703
LMArena Multi-Turn14081458
Short-Story Creative Writing76.5%—
WildBench81.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.2?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 lists at $1.75 and $14.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or GPT-5.2 better for coding?

GPT-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.6 versus 35.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and GPT-5.2 share?

40 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 has 67.

Related comparisons

Go deeper