Model comparison

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

GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 37.7 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 #31 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 50.1 to 24.7.
  • 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 Index54.137.7
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: 52.2 (#32), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 36.2 (#199)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%55.4%
LMArena WebDev14151275
GSO27.4%4.9%
WeirdML72.2%41.2%
LMArena Coding14471413
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: 40.0 (#24), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 23.7 (#116)

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: 50.1 (#33), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 24.7 (#141)

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: 59.8 (#32), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 34.9 (#151)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Math14391364
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: 59.2 (#29), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 36.4 (#159)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Expert14451337
GPQA Diamond91.4%—
Humanity's Last Exam27.8%—
SimpleQA Verified37.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate8.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.2: 50.9 (#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: 53.6 (#63), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 47.8 (#143)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Non-English14251345
LMArena Chinese14601356
LMArena French14561394
LMArena German14481324
LMArena Japanese14211309
LMArena Korean13901307
LMArena Russian14401367
LMArena Spanish14331360

Instruction Following GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 74.9 (#83), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 71.8 (#142)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14171356

Long Context GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 44.0 (#74), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 42.0 (#126)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14281379
CL-bench18.2%—

Writing & Preference GPT-5.2 leads

GPT-5.2: 67.0 (#30), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 55.5 (#142)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Text14391356
LMArena Creative Writing14021333
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 37.7 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: 52.2 versus 36.2 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