Model comparison

GPT-5.2 Codex vs Llama 2-70B

GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 24.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.2 Codex OpenAI

42.2

Rank #107 Reported

Llama 2-70B Meta

24.1

Rank #343 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 45.4 to 30.8.
  • Llama 2-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.2 Codex and Llama 2-70B specifications
GPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
ProviderOpenAIMeta
Noometry Index42.224.1
Released2025-12-182023-07-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.75—
Output $ / M tokens$14—
Results tracked535

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.2 Codex leads

GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.4 (#66), Llama 2-70B: 30.8 (#281)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
LMArena WebDev1339—
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%—
LMArena Coding—1079
ALE-Bench1,300—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: 40.7 (#20), Llama 2-70B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
Terminal-Bench66.5%—

Reasoning Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 2-70B: 13.7 (#324)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
LMArena Hard Prompts—1073
DTBench—41.6%
BIG-Bench Hard—64.9%
CommonsenseQA 2.0—50%
Epoch Capabilities Index—113.59
ForecastBench—51.4
HellaSwag—85.3%
LAMBADA—78.9%
PIQA—82.8%
WinoGrande—80.2%

Math Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 2-70B: 7.5 (#320)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—0%
LMArena Math—1091
MATH Level 5—3.3%
GSM8K—69.6%

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#305)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
GPQA Diamond—26.3%
LMArena Expert—1039
ARC (AI2) Challenge—78.3%
BoolQ—88.6%
MMLU—69.9%
OpenBookQA—60.2%
TriviaQA—87.6%

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 2-70B: 27.9 (#269)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
LMArena Non-English—1045
LMArena Chinese—994
LMArena French—1089
LMArena German—1041
LMArena Japanese—927
LMArena Korean—964
LMArena Russian—1083
LMArena Spanish—1142

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 2-70B: 55.1 (#273)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
LMArena Instruction Following—1071

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 2-70B: 32.2 (#265)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
LMArena Longer Query—1062

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 2-70B: 32.5 (#274)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 2-70B
LMArena Text—1115
LMArena Creative Writing—1075
LMArena Multi-Turn—1088

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.2 Codex better than Llama 2-70B?

GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 24.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-5.2 Codex or Llama 2-70B better for coding?

GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.4 versus 30.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Codex and Llama 2-70B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Codex has 5 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-70B has 35.

Related comparisons

Go deeper