Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-5.2 Codex vs Qwen3 Max

Qwen3 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.2 Codex OpenAI

42.2

Rank #107 Reported

Qwen3 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

43.5

Rank #82 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 Max in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 45.4 to 42.4.
  • Qwen3 Max is cheaper at $1.20 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2 Codex.
  • GPT-5.2 Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 262K.

Side by side

GPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.243.5
Released2025-12-182025-09-23
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window400K262K
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1.75$1.20
Output $ / M tokens$14$6
Results tracked533

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), Qwen3 Max: 42.4 (#93)

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
ALE-Bench1,300370.45
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
LMArena WebDev1339—
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%—
LMArena Coding—1456

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: 40.7 (#20), Qwen3 Max: —

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
Terminal-Bench66.5%—
Vending-Bench 2—71.56

Reasoning Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen3 Max: 22.0 (#186)

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
Kagi LLM Benchmark—72.5%
NYT Connections (extended)—30.1%
Chess Puzzles—4%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1448
Mystery Game Puzzles—5%
DTBench—82.1%
LMCA—28.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—142.41

Math Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen3 Max: 37.6 (#94)

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—73.3%
LMArena Math—1447
MATH Level 5—97.1%

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#72)

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
GPQA Diamond—72.6%
SimpleQA Verified—48.7%
LMArena Expert—1457

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen3 Max: 53.9 (#58)

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
LMArena Non-English—1429
LMArena Chinese—1479
LMArena French—1450
LMArena German—1463
LMArena Japanese—1399
LMArena Korean—1397
LMArena Russian—1428
LMArena Spanish—1463

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen3 Max: 75.0 (#81)

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
LMArena Instruction Following—1420

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#129)

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench—14.5%
LMArena Longer Query—1439

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, Qwen3 Max: 62.6 (#72)

BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexQwen3 Max
LMArena Text—1439
LMArena Creative Writing—1401
LMArena Multi-Turn—1446

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.2 Codex better than Qwen3 Max?

Qwen3 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 Codex or Qwen3 Max?

Qwen3 Max is cheaper. It lists at $1.20 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Codex lists at $1.75 and $14.

Is GPT-5.2 Codex or Qwen3 Max better for coding?

GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.4 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.2 Codex does, with 400K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Codex and Qwen3 Max share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Codex has 5 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper