LogoLMSpeed
  • Home
  • Free
  • Models
  • Providers
  • Docs
LogoLMSpeed
LogoLMSpeed

The best API speed test tool

GitHubGitHubTwitterX (Twitter)Email
Product
  • Features
  • Pricing
  • FAQ
Leaderboard
  • Overview
  • Speed Ranking
  • Latency Ranking
  • Health Ranking
  • Model Pricing
  • Model Speed
  • Reasoning
  • Coding
Models
  • All Models
  • GPT
  • Claude
  • Gemini
  • DeepSeek
  • Llama
  • Qwen
Free Models
  • All Free Models
  • Free GPT
  • Free Claude
  • Free Gemini
  • Free DeepSeek
  • Free Llama
  • Free Qwen
Resources
  • Speed Test
  • Provider Directory
  • Documentation
Legal
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
© 2026 LMSpeed All Rights Reserved.Made by Nexmoe with ❤️
Back to models

Data points: 81

On this page

Key TakeawaysComparison sheetBenchmark score comparisonAPI audit comparisonProvider examplesWhen to choose each modelFAQRelated compare reports

Key Takeaways

The readout for Claude Opus 4 and GPT-5.2, before the detailed comparison sheet.

Decision read

GPT-5.2

GPT-5.2 currently has the stronger profile, with verified wins split 0 to 6.

Evidence depth

81 data points

Includes 8 benchmark rows, 0 audit samples, and 8 provider examples.

Selection signal

Start with GPT-5.2

The charts below split 16 high-signal samples across speed, scores, and audit health.

Model compare

Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-5.2

claude-opus-4-vs-gpt-5-2

Model A

Claude

Claude Opus 4

Model B

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

Overall leaderContenderLeading
Verified metric wins0 wins6 wins
Where it leadsNo dataCheapest input price, Average speed, First-token latency, Free providers, Provider coverage, Recent tests
Model metadataClaude Opus 4 exposes 200K tokens; notable signals: Text input, Image input, File input, Text output.GPT-5.2 exposes 128K tokens; notable signals: Text input, Image input, File input, Text output.
DeveloperAnthropicOpenAI
Context window200K tokens128K tokens
Max output32K tokens16.4K tokens
ReleasedMay 2025Dec 2025
Modalities

Input

ImageTextFile

Output

Text

Input

FileImageText

Output

Text
Features
Text inputImage inputFile inputText outputTool callingReasoning
Text inputImage inputFile inputText outputTool callingStructured outputsJSON mode
ParametersNo dataNo data
TokenizerClaudeGPT
Knowledge cutoff2025-01-31No data
OpenRouter IDanthropic/claude-opus-4openai/gpt-5.2-chat
ReferencesNo dataNo data

Benchmark score comparison

Third-party benchmark profile synced into LMSpeed; only metrics available for both models are shown.

Metric
ClaudeClaude Opus 4
OpenAIGPT-5.2
LiveCodeBench
54.2%#52
88.9%#4
MMLU-Pro
86.0%#13
87.4%#6
GPQA
70.1%#78
90.3%#9
HLE
5.9%#81
35.4%#9
SciCode
40.9%#41
52.1%#9
Input price
$15.00/M#43
$1.75/M#35
Time to first answer token
1.87 s#41
115.69 s#109
Output price
$75.00/M#52
$14.00/M#43

API audit comparison

Latest completed audits from shared providers, with four safety and integrity score groups plus report links.

Provider
ClaudeClaude Opus 4
OpenAIGPT-5.2
No completed audits are available from shared providers yet.

Provider examples

Speed aggregates and input/output pricing share each provider row for real API selection and migration cost checks.

Provider
ClaudeClaude Opus 4
OpenAIGPT-5.2
N1N15 tests
Claude

Claude Opus 4

speed / latency

N/A / N/A

input / output

No data

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

speed / latency

56 tok/s / 1798ms

input / output

No data

PackyAPI10 tests
Claude

Claude Opus 4

speed / latency

N/A / N/A

input / output

No data

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

speed / latency

94 tok/s / 11492ms

input / output

No data

ModelPool5 tests
Claude

Claude Opus 4

claude-opus-4-20250514

speed / latency

N/A / N/A

input / output

$1.29/M / $6.43/M

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

gpt-5.2-chat-latest

speed / latency

64 tok/s / 5256ms

input / output

$0.150/M / $1.20/M

Rnglg2 API5 tests
Claude

Claude Opus 4

speed / latency

N/A / N/A

input / output

No data

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

speed / latency

55 tok/s / 1434ms

input / output

No data

WONG公益站5 tests
Claude

Claude Opus 4

speed / latency

N/A / N/A

input / output

No data

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

speed / latency

64 tok/s / 2953ms

input / output

No data

CHB API
Claude

Claude Opus 4

claude-opus-4-20250514

speed / latency

No data

input / output

$0.205/M / $1.03/M

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

gpt-5.2-medium

speed / latency

No data

input / output

$0.024/M / $0.192/M

Zero API
Claude

Claude Opus 4

claude-opus-4-20250514

speed / latency

No data

input / output

$0.342/M / $1.71/M

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

gpt-5.2

speed / latency

No data

input / output

$0.120/M / $0.959/M

KKSJ-AI
Claude

Claude Opus 4

claude-opus-4-20250514

speed / latency

No data

input / output

$9.25/M / $46.23/M

OpenAI

GPT-5.2

gpt-5.2-chat-latest

speed / latency

No data

input / output

$0.216/M / $1.73/M

When to choose each model

This report only uses LMSpeed data for Claude Opus 4 and GPT-5.2: pricing, speed aggregates, third-party benchmark scores, and shared provider samples.

Guidance
ClaudeClaude Opus 4
OpenAIGPT-5.2
When to choose each model

Claude Opus 4

Claude Opus 4 does not clearly lead on the verified metrics here, so check provider-specific pricing before choosing.

GPT-5.2

GPT-5.2 is stronger when you prioritize Cheapest input price, Average speed, First-token latency, Free providers, Provider coverage, Recent tests.

FAQ

TL;DR: GPT-5.2 leads across 81 verifiable data points, including pricing, speed, latency, benchmarks, and provider examples.

Why is this comparison indexable?
It has 6 verifiable comparison points, and both models have pricing or benchmark data.
Are missing metrics invented?
No. Metrics without LMSpeed data are omitted from this report.

Related compare reports

Continue from Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-5.2 into nearby model comparisons with enough verified LMSpeed data.

ClaudeClaude Opus 4 vs GPT-5.46 verified data pointsClaudeClaude Opus 4 vs Claude Opus 4.66 verified data pointsClaudeClaude Opus 4 vs GPT-56 verified data pointsClaudeClaude Opus 4 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro6 verified data points

Data as of Jun 13, 2026, 03:01 PM·Rankings are based on community-submitted tests and periodic health probes. Advisory only, not official data.