OpenAI’s GPT-5.2 is coming in hot, and the initial wave of numbers indicates it outperforms xAI’s Grok 4 series at a variety of tasks. The larger story is not raw scores (though it would be simple enough to dismiss those as mere Amdahl’s Law mumbo-jumbo), but how the gains get turned into actual work—coding, for example, or research or creative inspiration—where both models are making aggressive plays for developer and enterprise mindshare.
Early benchmark snapshots and where each model excels
Independent leaderboard coverage is just beginning to cohere, but early indicators are clear. LMSYS Arena population data on GPT-5.2 have already cropped up in a few lanes (looking at you WebDev top), so Grok has positioned itself accordingly. And if more general entries drop, analysts presume GPT-5.2 to displace GPT-5.1 where it rested close to the top, further clamping down on Grok 4 and 4.1.
OpenAI’s own disclosures, although not yet independently confirmed, present a coherent image. On Creative Writing v3, GPT-5.2 reports an ELO of 1675 against Grok 4.1’s 1268.6586 ELO—a significant lead for tasks such as narrative generation, marketing copy, and stylistic editing. GDPval-AA, although measuring the level of fact and analytical reasoning, directly assesses GPT-5.2 at 1474 vs. Grok’s 1041, indicating more reliability under pressure.
The knowledge-intensive tests are closer to evenly split but tilt slightly in the favor of OpenAI. GPQA Diamond, a difficult graduate-level benchmark, shows GPT-5.2 at 90.3% vs. Grok 4 at 87.7%. It holds true on math-heavy tests, too: AIME 2025 had GPT-5.1 at 95.7% versus Grok’s 92.7%, suggesting GPT-5.2 likely extends the lead. FrontierMath is also said to lean heavily in favor of GPT-5.2, a bright spot for the quants and researchers.
Context matters with benchmarks. Scores are directional, not destiny. Tone control might be worth more to creative professionals than raw ELO, or engineers might need to care about how models behave inside toolchains and repos. Yet, taken across writing, reasoning, and math—the early indications suggest GPT-5.2 is the benchmark to beat, and Grok 4.1 still finds pockets of strength on text leaderboards where it has excelled historically.
Pricing and access tiers, subscriptions, and limits
Cost of entry is in favor of OpenAI for most people. Access to GPT-5.2 includes a ChatGPT subscription that begins at $20 per month for entry, and increases in tiers with larger limits and enterprise controls included. Grok’s free tier restricts users to Grok 4, not Grok 4.1, so proper testing usually means a paid plan. SuperGrok ranges from $30 per month all the way up to $300 for more extensive usage.
For those who travel regularly for longer-form, tool-assisted or tool-dependent sessions, these differences each month can really add up. If you’re outfitting a 50-person content or engineering team, $20 versus $30 per seat is now material that fights its way onto your budget line items. Enterprises should also consider overage policies and rate limits, as well as fine-tuning or custom model options when modeling total cost of ownership.
Features, multimodal tools, and ecosystem integration
Both systems are conversational, full-stack multimodal generation and chat assistants. GPT-5.2 supports image generation and is able to export video through the Sora 2 pipeline. Image and video production is provided by Grok Imagine. In application, image quality over trials was on a par with full-trials-only systems such as Google’s Veo 3 and LumaAI’s Ray3, which are designed for motion-picture outputs and advanced physics convergence.
Where GPT now extends the lead is in ecosystem reach. ChatGPT is also integrated throughout a broader set of productivity suites, developer tools, and learning platforms, simplifying implementation and governance for IT. This ubiquity has mattered: fewer integration layers, more resilient workflows, and better tooling around prompts, retrieval, and function calling. Grok compensates with close integration with social data streams and a very high feedback cadence, which some real-time monitoring (creator) workflows require.
Developers should consider tool-use fidelity—how faithfully the model invokes functions, follows schema, or respects constraints. Early testers report GPT-5.2 is less fragile in long, multi-step sessions, and Grok’s conversational style and willingness to “think out loud” can be an advantage in more exploratory work. Those differences show up most distinctly in code reviewing, data transformation, and research summarization pipelines.
What it means for buyers evaluating GPT-5.2 vs Grok
If you care about top-line performance on writing, reasoning, and math benchmarks, GPT-5.2 is the safer bet right now. The price spread leans in OpenAI’s favor for individual pros and most teams as well. Grok 4.1 is still competitive, especially for users who enjoy its dialog system, and can still achieve good results on text-dominated leaderboards.
The pragmatic route is a direct pilot involving your workloads. Run the same prompts through each model, turn on tool calling and downloading where appropriate, and record results over a week of real-world tasks. Benchmarks establish expectations; your data and workflows drive the decision.
