Model comparison

GPT-5.2 Codex vs Llama 3.1-405B

GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.2 Codex OpenAI

42.6

Rank #111 Reported

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 41.0 to 21.0.
  • Llama 3.1-405B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.2 Codex and Llama 3.1-405B specifications
GPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
ProviderOpenAIMeta
Noometry Index42.630.7
Released2025-12-182024-07-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.75—
Output $ / M tokens$14—
Results tracked542

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: 45.5 (#71), Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
LMArena WebDev1339—
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%—
WeirdML—21.4%
LMArena Coding—1291
ALE-Bench1,300—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.2 Codex leads

GPT-5.2 Codex: 41.0 (#22), Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
Terminal-Bench66.5%—
TheAgentCompany—7.4%
Cybench—7.5%

Reasoning Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
SimpleBench—23%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—45%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1269
DTBench—61.4%
BIG-Bench Hard—82.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—128.75
ForecastBench—59.9
HellaSwag—89.2%
PIQA—85.9%
WinoGrande—89.2%

Math Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—9.7%
Omni-MATH—24.9%
LMArena Math—1281
MATH Level 5—49.8%

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
GPQA Diamond—50.9%
MMLU-Pro—72.3%
Confabulations—17.6%
GPQA (HELM)—52.2%
LMArena Expert—1243
ARC (AI2) Challenge—95.3%
MMLU—84.5%
TriviaQA—82.7%

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Non-English—1248
LMArena Chinese—1242
LMArena French—1279
LMArena German—1252
LMArena Japanese—1208
LMArena Korean—1184
LMArena Russian—1265
LMArena Spanish—1260

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
IFEval—81.1%
LMArena Instruction Following—1259

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Longer Query—1266

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Text—1284
LMArena Creative Writing—1262
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—870
WildBench—78.3%
LMArena Multi-Turn—1297

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.2 Codex better than Llama 3.1-405B?

GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-5.2 Codex or Llama 3.1-405B better for coding?

GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.5 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Codex and Llama 3.1-405B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Codex has 5 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper