GPT-5.2 Mini wins on price ($1.2 vs $2.5/1M input). GPT-5.4 wins on coding (90 vs 78) and writing quality and context window (272K vs 128K). For most workflows, GPT-5.4 is the stronger default — best for agentic automation and desktop control workflows.
The shortest way to see the safest default, the lower-cost option, and the specialist pick before you read deeper.
GPT-5.4 is the safest overall answer here when you want the strongest default instead of the lowest list price.
Switch the scoring lens to see whether the top answer changes when you care more about cost, speed, or long-document work.
OpenAI / Premium / Apr 29, 2026
Best for agentic automation and desktop control workflows.
Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.
You need the highest coding benchmark scores — Claude Opus 4.6 and Sonnet 4.6 lead SWE-bench.
The fastest way to see where the recommendation shifts when your priority changes.
Only frontier model that can control a desktop via API (click, type, navigate)
Strong at multi-step agentic tasks and autonomous workflows
Competitive coding performance with 74.9% SWE-bench score
Claude Opus 4.6 and Sonnet 4.6 outperform it on pure coding benchmarks
Smaller context window (272K) vs Gemini 3.1 Pro (2M) for research
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-5.4 wins on more categories — coding, research, reasoning. 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-5.4 costs $2.5/1M input and $15/1M output.
GPT-5.4 has the larger context window at 272K tokens vs GPT-5.2 Mini's 128K. For large document analysis, GPT-5.4 is the stronger pick.
GPT-5.4 is better for coding with a score of 90 vs GPT-5.2 Mini's 78. For the highest coding quality available, Claude Sonnet 4.6 (79.6% SWE-bench) or Opus 4.6 (80.8%) remain benchmarks.
GPT-5.2 Mini is faster with a fast speed rating (score: 4) vs GPT-5.4's balanced rating (score: 3).
Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 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-5.4 leads on coding with a score of 90 vs 78 for GPT-5.2 Mini.
GPT-5.4 has the larger context window: 272K vs 128K for GPT-5.2 Mini.
GPT-5.2 Mini is cheaper at $1.2/1M input tokens vs $2.5/1M for GPT-5.4.
Choose GPT-5.4 for coding and research — agentic 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.
