# GPT-5.2 Pro vs Qwen3.5-Flash

> GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-Flash costs 330× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-2-pro-vs-qwen3-5-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## Summary

- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.2 Pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash 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 36.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 74% for GPT-5.2 Pro and 18.2% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
- Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $21 / $168 for GPT-5.2 Pro.
- Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 400K.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 52.2 | 42.3 |
| Rank | 34 | 105 |
| Context | 400K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $21 | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | $168 | $0.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GPT-5.2 Pro: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.9 (#234)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1243 |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1412 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 221.8 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-5.2 Pro: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 462.69 |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.8 (#31)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 32.9 (#63)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.41 | 143.98 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 54.2% | — |
| SimpleBench | 57.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 21% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1404 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 20% |
| DTBench | — | 82.9% |
| LMCA | — | 29.1% |

## Math

- GPT-5.2 Pro: 64.8 (#23)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 36.3 (#117)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 74% | 18.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | 0% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1407 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 6.2% |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.2 Pro: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#84)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 20.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.5% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1408 |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.2 Pro: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.7 (#116)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1446 |
| LMArena French | — | 1412 |
| LMArena German | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1369 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1344 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1379 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1399 |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.2 Pro: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.8 (#133)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1374 |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.2 Pro: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#119)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1392 |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.2 Pro: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 58.2 (#117)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1343 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1393 |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.2 Pro better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-Flash costs 330× 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 Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Pro lists at $21 and $168.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 400K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Pro and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Pro has 8 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.