Navigate
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

GPT-5.2 Chat vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B (medium)

GPT-5.2 Chat leads on average score with 8.0 vs 7.1. GPT-5.2 Chat has the lower benchmark cost at $0.604 vs $1.046. GPT-5.2 Chat is faster at 7.65s vs 64.16s, with pass rates of 74.2% vs 71.2%.

Last updated at: 2026-07-28

Rank
#37
Total Output Tokens
30,424
Response Time (avg)
7.65s
Total Cost
$0.604
Rank
#82
Total Output Tokens
487,218
Response Time (avg)
64.16s
Total Cost
$1.046
Recommended model GPT-5.2 Chat

It has the best score here (8.0), while costing about 1.7x less than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B (medium).

Detailed comparison

Metric GPT-5.2 Chat GPT-5.2 Chat none Release: 2025-12-11 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B Qwen3.5-122B-A10B medium Release: 2026-02-24
Score 8.0 7.1
Rank #37 #82
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 8.6 8.5
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 74.2% 71.2%
Flaky tests 4 4
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 4.308 8.509
Total Cost $0.604 $1.046
Input Price $1.750 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Output Price $14.000 / 1M $2.080 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 101,248 124,771
Output Tokens 30,424 44,077
Reasoning Tokens 0 443,141
Response Time (avg) 7.65s 64.16s
Response Time (max) 38.52s 519.30s
Response Time (total) 168.39s 1411.60s

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#37 GPT-5.2 Chat

none
Cost
$0.010
Time
15.3s
Tokens
797 tok

#82 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

medium
Cost
$0.019
Time
48.7s
Tokens
6,034 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
GPT-5.2 Chat 8.8 7.8 88.9% 1 9.82s 7,305 6,731 0
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 6.0 7.2 55.6% 1 114.48s 7,630 8,057 82,578

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair