Model comparison
GPT-5.2 Pro vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 46.2 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs 37× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GPT-5.2 Pro scores higher in 2 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 65.3 to 39.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 79.3% for GPT-5.2 Pro and 89.6% for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $21 / $168 for GPT-5.2 Pro.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 400K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 52.3 | 46.2 |
| Released | 2025-12-11 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $21 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $168 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | — | 1457 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | — | 1204 |
Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.5 (#33), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.3% | 89.6% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 54.2% | — |
| SimpleBench | 57.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1448 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.4 | — |
Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 65.3 (#29), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 74% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1442 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1445 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1475 |
| LMArena French | — | 1466 |
| LMArena German | — | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1447 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1420 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1431 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1436 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1452 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.2 Pro better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 46.2 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs 37× 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 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Pro lists at $21 and $168.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent does, with 1M tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Pro and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Pro has 8 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.