GPT-5.2

openai/gpt-5.2-20251211

This model accepts file, image, and text inputs and provides text outputs. It has a context length of 400,000 tokens and supports tools and reasoning. Pricing is $1.75 per million input tokens and $14 per million output tokens.

  • tool use
  • structured outputs
  • reasoning

At a glance

provideropenai
releasedDec 8, 2025
context400K
input / M$1.75

Specifications

What the API gives you

Context window
400K tokens
Max output
128K tokens
Input price
$1.75 / 1M tokens
Output price
$14 / 1M tokens
Cache read
$0.17 / 1M tokens
Modalities
file, image, text → text
Knowledge cutoff
—
Released
Dec 8, 2025

Measured evidence

Public benchmark record

BFCL
55.9%2026-10-21
Design Arena Coding
1152 Elo2026-10-21
Design Arena Full-stack Agent
1043 Elo2026-10-14
Design Arena UI
1158 Elo2026-10-21
Design Arena Web-app Agent
1086 Elo2026-10-21
Design Arena Website
1156 Elo2026-10-21
FACTS Grounding
76.2%2026-10-21
LiveBench Agentic Coding
50.3%2026-10-18
LiveBench Coding
76.1%2026-10-18
LiveBench Data Analysis
78.2%2026-10-18
LiveBench Instruction Following
61.8%2026-10-18
LiveBench Language
79.8%2026-10-18
LiveBench Math
93.2%2026-10-18
LiveBench Reasoning
83.2%2026-10-18
LMArena Creative Writing‡
1376 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Instruction Following‡
1409 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Long Query‡
1408 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Math‡
1440 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Text‡
1437 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Text Factuality‡
1441 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Vision‡
1243 Elo2026-10-19high effort
LMArena Vision Diagrams‡
1276 Elo2026-10-19high effort
LMArena Vision OCR‡
1260 Elo2026-10-19high effort
LMArena WebDev
1417 Elo2026-10-19
SWE-bench Verified (verified-500)‡
72.8%2026-10-21mini-SWE-agent 2.0.0, high effort, evaluated 2026-02-17
tau2-bench (1.0.1)‡
12.6%2026-05-26none effort, evaluated 2026-05-26
tau2-bench (1.0.1)‡
32.2%2026-05-05high effort, evaluated 2026-05-05

LMArena data licensed CC-BY-4.0. Aider (Apache-2.0) and SWE-bench (MIT) are open. Design Arena uses blind human preference. ‡ Submitted scaffold plus model result. Compare the harness and effort settings, not only the model name.

Task evidence

How broad is the support?

Each status is exact to this model version and the selected task. Official release claims remain provisional.

  • Best LLM for Business WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Marketing CopyEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Chat & RoleplayEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Creative WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Roleplay & CharacterEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Show all 45 tasks
  • Best LLM for a General AssistantEstablished evidence

    91% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Frontend & UIEstablished evidence

    91% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Document SummarizationEstablished evidence

    85% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for SummarizationEstablished evidence

    85% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Logic & Problem SolvingEstablished evidence

    82% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Code CompletionEstablished evidence

    79% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Math & ReasoningEstablished evidence

    76% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Competition MathEstablished evidence

    70% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Open-Weight LLM for Self-HostingEstablished evidence

    64% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Image UnderstandingEstablished evidence

    61% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for RAG & Long ContextEstablished evidence

    61% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for CodingEstablished evidence

    60% of intended weighted task evidence across 4 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Fast SummariesEstablished evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Value LLMEstablished evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for JSON & Schema OutputEstablished evidence

    53% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Structured Data ExtractionEstablished evidence

    53% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Literary TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Everyday TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Grounded RAGEstablished evidence

    48% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Local LLM for CodingEstablished evidence

    47% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Tool & Function CallingEstablished evidence

    46% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 6 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Debugging & Code ReviewEstablished evidence

    44% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Cheap LLM for High VolumeEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Cheapest Capable LLMEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for AI AgentsEstablished evidence

    36% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 9 of 9 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Agentic CodingEstablished evidence

    36% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for OCR & DocumentsProvisional evidence

    65% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Structured-output eval or VLMEvalKit tasks. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Charts & DiagramsProvisional evidence

    65% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Structured-output eval or VLMEvalKit tasks. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Vision & DocumentsProvisional evidence

    60% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Structured-output eval or VLMEvalKit tasks. 4 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Document ParsingProvisional evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Structured-output eval or VLMEvalKit tasks. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Massive ContextProvisional evidence

    47% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LongBench v2. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Hermes AgentProvisional evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Agent or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for OpenHandsProvisional evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Agent or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for GooseProvisional evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Agent or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for OpenClawProvisional evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Agent or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for High-Volume ExtractionProvisional evidence

    21% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Route reliability or Structured-output eval. 1 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Autonomous AgentsProvisional evidence

    13% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Agent or LMArena Agent Task Outcome. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Computer & Browser UseProvisional evidence

    11% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Agent or OSWorld Verified. 3 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Recommendation coverage

Where this model appears

Not currently included in a published recommendation. The task evidence panel above says exactly what is confirmed and what is still missing.

Catalog data via OpenRouter and models.dev. Last checked within the past 6 hours.