GPT-5.2 vs Grok Code Fast 1

Overview: In our 12-test suite GPT-5.2 wins 8 benchmarks, Grok Code Fast 1 wins none, and 4 are ties. Detailed comparison (scores shown as GPT-5.2 vs Grok Code Fast 1):

• Strategic analysis: 5 vs 3. GPT-5.2 is tied for 1st of 54 (with 25 others) while Grok ranks 36/54 — GPT is meaningfully stronger for nuanced tradeoffs and numeric reasoning.
• Constrained rewriting: 4 vs 3. GPT-5.2 ranks 6/53; Grok ranks 31/53 — GPT handles tight character/format constraints better.
• Creative problem solving: 5 vs 3. GPT-5.2 ties for 1st of 54; Grok is 30/54 — GPT generates more non-obvious, feasible ideas.
• Faithfulness: 5 vs 4. GPT-5.2 ties for 1st of 55; Grok ranks 34/55 — GPT sticks to source material with fewer hallucinations.
• Long context: 5 vs 4. GPT-5.2 ties for 1st of 55; Grok ranks 38/55 — GPT is superior for retrieval across 30K+ tokens.
• Safety calibration: 5 vs 2. GPT-5.2 ties for 1st of 55; Grok ranks 12/55 — GPT is substantially better at refusing harmful prompts while allowing legitimate ones.
• Persona consistency: 5 vs 4. GPT-5.2 ties for 1st of 53; Grok ranks 38/53 — GPT better maintains character and resists injection.
• Multilingual: 5 vs 4. GPT-5.2 ties for 1st of 55; Grok ranks 36/55 — GPT yields higher-quality non-English output. Ties: structured output 4/4 (both rank 26/54), tool calling 4/4 (both rank 18/54), classification 4/4 (both tied for 1st of 53), and agentic planning 5/5 (both tied for 1st of 54). Practical meaning: Grok matches GPT-5.2 on structured formats, tool selection/sequencing, classification, and agentic planning — making it solid for automated coding and tool-driven workflows where those specific skills matter. External benchmarks: GPT-5.2 also scores 73.8% on SWE-bench Verified and 96.1% on AIME 2025 (Epoch AI); Grok has no external SWE/AIME scores in the payload.

Per the payload, GPT-5.2 charges $1.75/input + $14.00/output per mtoken; Grok Code Fast 1 charges $0.20/input + $1.50/output per mtoken. Summed per-1k-token (input+output) cost: GPT-5.2 ≈ $15.75 per 1k tokens → $15,750 per 1M tokens, $157,500 per 10M, $1,575,000 per 100M. Grok ≈ $1.70 per 1k tokens → $1,700 per 1M, $17,000 per 10M, $170,000 per 100M. The payload also reports an output-only price ratio of 9.33× (14 / 1.5). Who should care: startups and high-volume applications (10M–100M tokens/month) will see seven-figure differences with GPT-5.2; teams prioritizing quality, safety, and extreme long-context may accept the higher spend, while cost-sensitive services, prototypes, or consumer-scale inference should prefer Grok Code Fast 1.

Choose GPT-5.2 if you need the highest accuracy, safety, and long-context performance — e.g., critical analytics, legal/medical assistants, large-document retrieval, high-stakes decisioning, or math-heavy tasks (AIME 2025: 96.1% in payload). Choose Grok Code Fast 1 if your priority is low-cost, high-throughput inference for engineering workflows or prototypes where tool calling, agentic planning, and classification are sufficient and visible reasoning traces (uses_reasoning_tokens) help debugging; it costs roughly $1,700 per 1M tokens vs $15,750 for GPT-5.2.