Model comparison
GPT-5.2 Pro vs Granite 3.1 8b Instruct
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 65.3 to 33.0.
- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | IBM |
| Noometry Index | 52.3 | 32.4 |
| Released | 2025-12-11 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $21 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $168 | — |
| Results tracked | 8 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | — | 1186 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 27.1% |
Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.5 (#33), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 54.2% | — |
| SimpleBench | 57.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1145 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.4 | — |
Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 65.3 (#29), Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 74% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1152 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1142 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1099 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1145 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1092 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1131 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1162 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1150 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1129 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1108 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.2 Pro better than Granite 3.1 8b Instruct?
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Pro and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Pro has 8 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13.