GPT-5.2 wins on coding (85 vs 80) and writing quality and price ($1.75 vs $3/1M input). For most workflows, GPT-5.2 is the stronger default — capable but outclassed — gpt-5.4 is now cheaper and better.
The safest Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2 default, the cheaper option worth trying first, and the specialist pick — before you read the detail below.
GPT-5.2 is the strongest answer here for Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2 — pick it when quality of output matters more than the $1.75/1M/1M input you pay for it.
Grok 4 handles the same job for about 49% less per token. Start here and only move up if the output is not good enough.
Grok 4 is the fastest of these for Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2 — worth it when latency is what the reader notices, not the last few points of reasoning depth.
GPT-5.2 leads on coding with a score of 85 vs 80 for Grok 4.
Grok 4 has the larger context window: 256K vs 200K for GPT-5.2.
GPT-5.2 is cheaper at $1.75/1M input tokens vs $3/1M for Grok 4.
Go with GPT-5.2 if you want one model to handle coding and research — it targets serious coding and complex product work.
Switch to Grok 4 when your work is mostly historical reference — use Grok 4.7 for new work; on that narrower brief it is the better tool.
Both models serve different primary workflows — GPT-5.2 for serious coding and complex product work, Grok 4 for historical reference — use Grok 4.7 for new work — so running each where it has a clear edge often beats forcing one to do both.
Switch the scoring lens to see whether the Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2 answer changes when cost, speed, or long-document depth leads the decision.
xAI / Balanced / Sep 2, 2026
Strong coding value with 2M context — an underrated pick at this price.
Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.
You need the highest writing quality or the most reliable production-grade output — Claude wins both.
Where the Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2 recommendation shifts once you weigh price or latency differently.
Strong coding value with 2M context — an underrated pick at this price.
Capable but outclassed — GPT-5.4 is now cheaper and better.
List prices and published scores — the numbers this page's pick is built from.
| Model | Input | Output | Est. month | Context | Speed | Coding | Writing | Research |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.2OpenAI | $1.75/1M | $14.00/1M | $46 | 200k tokens | Balanced | 85 | 82 | 84 |
| Grok 4xAI | $2.00/1M | $6.00/1M | $32 | 2M tokens | Fast | 92 | 70 | 86 |
Scores out of 100 — how we evaluate models. “Est. month” is 10M in / 2M out at list price: a ceiling, no discounts.
Why each one is on the shortlist for Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2, what it is genuinely good at, and where we would steer you away from it.
Ranked first here for Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2: 85/100 on coding, with the widest margin of anything in this line-up.
Reliable OpenAI flagship for serious coding and product work — a strong default before GPT-5.4 was released.
You're starting a new project — GPT-5.4 is cheaper and more capable.
Still capable but GPT-5.4 at $2.50/1M input is now cheaper and better. Hard to justify GPT-5.2 at $12/1M for new projects.
Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the GPT-5.2 page.
The value option for Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2: about 49% less per token than GPT-5.2, at 92/100 on coding. Worth starting here and moving up only if the output disappoints.
xAI's latest flagship with strong coding benchmark performance, a 2M token context window, and aggressive pricing at $2/$6 per million tokens.
You need the highest writing quality or the most reliable production-grade output — Claude wins both.
Strong coding benchmark with excellent value. The $2/$6 pricing and 2M context make it competitive with more expensive alternatives.
Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the Grok 4 page.
UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.
Newsletter
We email when the Grok 4 vs GPT-5.2 pick changes, when one of these models moves on price, or when something new displaces the current leader.
No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.
GPT-5.2 wins on more of the categories we score — coding, research, reasoning — so it is the better default of the two. Grok 4 is the better pick when your work is mostly historical reference — use Grok 4.7 for new work. Neither is universally "better": GPT-5.2 is aimed at serious coding and complex product work, Grok 4 at historical reference — use Grok 4.7 for new work.
GPT-5.2 is cheaper at $1.75/1M input and $14/1M output. Grok 4 costs $3/1M input and $15/1M output.
Grok 4 has the larger context window at 256K tokens vs GPT-5.2's 200K. For large document analysis, Grok 4 is the stronger pick.
GPT-5.2 is better for coding with a score of 85 vs Grok 4's 80 (out of 100). Claude Opus 5.5 is the overall coding leader in this directory at 100/100.
Grok 4 is faster with a fast speed rating (score: 4) vs GPT-5.2's balanced rating (score: 3). Speed matters most for interactive and high-throughput work; for batch jobs the GPT-5.2 latency penalty is usually invisible.
Superseded by GPT-5.4 for most use cases. Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads on both coding and writing quality. Avoid it if you're starting a new project — GPT-5.4 is cheaper and more capable. That is the main case for looking at Grok 4 instead.
Retired from xAI's API on May 15, 2026. Less established ecosystem and tooling than OpenAI or Anthropic. Avoid it if you need the highest writing quality or the most reliable production-grade output — Claude wins both. Against GPT-5.2 specifically, the gap shows up most on coding (85 vs 80).
Take a moderate workload of 10M input and 2M output tokens a month. Grok 4 runs $60.00 (at $3/1M in and $15/1M out); GPT-5.2 runs $45.50 (at $1.75/1M in and $14/1M out). That is a $14.50/month difference — GPT-5.2 is the cheaper of the two at this volume, and the gap scales linearly as you send more. Output tokens dominate the bill on both, so prompt length matters far less than response length.
Yes, and for most teams that beats picking one. A common split is GPT-5.2 for serious coding and complex product work, with Grok 4 handling historical reference — use Grok 4.7 for new work. Since GPT-5.2 is both the stronger and the cheaper option here, a split mainly makes sense if Grok 4 covers a capability you specifically need.