Model comparison

GPT-5.2 vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct

GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.2 OpenAI

54.1

Rank #34 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.2 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.2 leads 50.2 to 25.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Terminal-Bench: 64.9% for GPT-5.2 and 27.2% for Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct.
  • Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct is cheaper at $1.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2.
  • GPT-5.2 accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.2 and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct specifications
GPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index54.138.1
Released2025-12-112025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K262K
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1.75$1.50
Output $ / M tokens$14$7.50
Results tracked6725

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 51.6 (#37), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 35.5 (#223)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%55.4%
LMArena WebDev14161275
GSO27.4%4.9%
WeirdML72.2%41.2%
LMArena Coding14471412
ALE-Bench1,294461.45
AlgoTune2.051.44
SWE-bench Verified73.8%—
SWE-bench Multilingual66.7%—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 40.2 (#24), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 23.9 (#123)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
Terminal-Bench64.9%27.2%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard55.9%—
GDPval49.7%—
Remote Labor Index2.5%—
τ²-bench Airline83%—
τ²-bench Banking32.2%—
τ²-bench Retail81.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom89.7%—
DeepResearch Bench41.1%—
LMArena Search1207—
METR Time Horizons75.3%—
Vending-Bench 23,591—

Reasoning GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 50.2 (#35), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 25.5 (#149)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
Kagi LLM Benchmark73.3%49.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14451372
ARC-AGI-252.9%—
SimpleBench45.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)83.6%—
ARC-AGI-186.2%—
Chess Puzzles49%—
EnigmaEval10.4%—
EBR-Bench23%—
Mystery Game Puzzles23%—
DTBench90.9%—
LMCA43.9%—
Epoch Capabilities Index153.45—
ForecastBench60.1—

Math GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 60.0 (#38), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 37.6 (#150)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Math14401365
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)67.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions72%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202596.1%—
ProofBench15%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)18.8%—

Knowledge GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 59.3 (#32), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 37.0 (#162)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Expert14451338
GPQA Diamond91.4%—
Humanity's Last Exam27.8%—
SimpleQA Verified37.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate8.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.2: 51.3 (#7), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Vision1268—
VPCT84%—
Furniture Assembly38.3%—
LMArena Document1405—

Multilingual GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 53.4 (#67), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 47.7 (#148)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Non-English14251346
LMArena Chinese14601357
LMArena French14551398
LMArena German14481325
LMArena Japanese14201310
LMArena Korean13921305
LMArena Russian14401366
LMArena Spanish14331360

Instruction Following GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 74.7 (#89), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 71.6 (#147)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14171355

Long Context GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 44.0 (#78), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 42.0 (#131)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14281378
CL-bench18.2%—

Writing & Preference GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 66.8 (#32), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 55.3 (#147)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Text14391357
LMArena Creative Writing14011333
LMArena Multi-Turn14581365
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1703—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.2 better than Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?

GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?

Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $1.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 lists at $1.75 and $14.

Is GPT-5.2 or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct better for coding?

GPT-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.6 versus 35.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 has 67 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct has 25.

Related comparisons

Go deeper