Model comparison
GPT-5.2 Pro vs Grok 4.1 Fast
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.1 Fast costs 210× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.2 Pro scores higher in 2 categories and Grok 4.1 Fast in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 64.8 to 30.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 79.3% for GPT-5.2 Pro and 87.4% for Grok 4.1 Fast.
- Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $21 / $168 for GPT-5.2 Pro.
- GPT-5.2 Pro accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 52.2 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2025-12-11 | 2025-06-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 128K |
| Max output | 128K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $21 | $0.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $168 | $0.50 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.8 (#236)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1241 |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1411 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 394.93 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.1 (#35)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 69.6% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 13.1% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1171 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 1,107 |
Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.8 (#31), Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.3 (#45)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 57.4% | 56% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.3% | 87.4% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 54.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1407 |
| DTBench | — | 87.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.41 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 61 |
Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 64.8 (#23), Grok 4.1 Fast: 30.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 74% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 60.9% |
| ProofBench | — | 4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1408 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 32.6 (#203)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 17.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1398 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#71)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1201 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.1 (#110)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1391 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1441 |
| LMArena French | — | 1416 |
| LMArena German | — | 1404 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1347 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1361 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1411 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.8 (#127)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1376 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#121)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1390 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.4 (#126)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1408 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1394 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1327 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1389 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.2 Pro better than Grok 4.1 Fast?
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.1 Fast costs 210× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 Pro or Grok 4.1 Fast?
Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Pro lists at $21 and $168.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.2 Pro does, with 400K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Pro and Grok 4.1 Fast share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Pro has 8 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.1 Fast has 32.