GPT-5.2 Mini wins on coding (78 vs 58) and price ($1.2 vs $5/1M input). For most workflows, GPT-4o is the stronger default — best all-around pick for image-heavy and multimodal workflows.
The shortest way to see the safest default, the lower-cost option, and the specialist pick before you read deeper.
GPT-4o is the safest overall answer here when you want the strongest default instead of the lowest list price.
Google: Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) is the lower-cost option to start with when you still need useful output at scale.
GPT-5.2 Mini is the better pick when response speed matters more than maximum reasoning depth.
GPT-5.2 Mini leads on coding with a score of 78 vs 58 for GPT-4o.
GPT-5.2 Mini is cheaper at $1.2/1M input tokens vs $5/1M for GPT-4o.
GPT-4o is the stronger default for images tasks.
Choose GPT-4o for images and writing — multimodal tasks and image-adjacent workflows.
Choose GPT-5.2 Mini when budget technical workflows and high-volume product integrations.
GPT-5.2 Mini is the more cost-efficient option at $1.2/1M — worth considering if token volume is a concern.
Switch the scoring lens to see whether the top answer changes when you care more about cost, speed, or long-document work.
OpenAI / Balanced / Mar 24, 2026
Solid OpenAI budget option, though Gemini Flash offers better value.
Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.
Cost is your primary concern — Gemini 3.1 Flash offers more for less.
The fastest way to see where the recommendation shifts when your priority changes.
Best all-around pick for image-heavy and multimodal workflows.
Solid OpenAI budget option, though Gemini Flash offers better value.
Strong multimodal understanding across images, audio, and text
Good balance between speed and overall quality
Reliable for teams that mix content types regularly
Outclassed by newer models on pure coding and reasoning
Gemini 3.1 Pro now handles multimodal at a lower price
UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.
Newsletter
Useful if you care about ranking shifts, pricing changes, or a better recommendation appearing in this decision path.
No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.
GPT-4o wins on more categories — images, writing, multimodal. GPT-5.2 Mini is the better pick when budget technical workflows and high-volume product integrations. The right choice depends on your specific use case.
GPT-5.2 Mini is cheaper at $1.2/1M input and $4.8/1M output. GPT-4o costs $5/1M input and $15/1M output.
Both GPT-4o and GPT-5.2 Mini have the same 128K context window.
GPT-5.2 Mini is better for coding with a score of 78 vs GPT-4o's 58. For the highest coding quality available, Claude Sonnet 4.6 (79.6% SWE-bench) or Opus 4.6 (80.8%) remain benchmarks.
Both GPT-4o and GPT-5.2 Mini have similar speed profiles — rated fast.
