Model comparison
GPT-5.2 Pro vs Qwen3.8 27B
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 46.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.8 27B costs 52× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.2 Pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.8 27B 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 37.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 79.3% for GPT-5.2 Pro and 54.5% for Qwen3.8 27B.
- Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper at $0.99 / $1.49 per million input/output tokens, against $21 / $168 for GPT-5.2 Pro.
- GPT-5.2 Pro accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3.8 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 52.3 | 46.0 |
| Released | 2025-12-11 | 2026-08-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $21 | $0.99 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $168 | $1.49 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1593 |
| SciCode | — | 46.6% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1482 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 47.5% |
Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.5 (#33), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 54.2% | 42.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.3% | 54.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | 87.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.4 | 149.38 |
| SimpleBench | 57.4% | — |
| CritPt | — | 5.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1460 |
| DTBench | — | 88% |
| LMCA | — | 41.4% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 45% |
Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 65.3 (#29), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 74% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1456 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1482 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1271 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1504 |
| LMArena French | — | 1465 |
| LMArena German | — | 1438 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1384 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1393 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1448 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1439 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1450 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1441 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1384 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1671 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1441 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.2 Pro better than Qwen3.8 27B?
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 46.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.8 27B costs 52× 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 Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.99 per million input tokens and $1.49 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 262K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Pro and Qwen3.8 27B share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Pro has 8 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.