| Signal | GPT-3.5 Turbo | Delta | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 43 | -43 | |
Context window size | 67 | -22 | |
Output Capacity | 60 | -25 | |
Pricing Tier | 2 | -12 | |
Recency | 0 | -100 | |
Versatility | 33 | -33 | |
| Overall Result | 0 wins | of 6 | 6 wins |
0
days ranked higher
0
days
30
days ranked higher
OpenAI
OpenAI
GPT-3.5 Turbo saves you $750.00/month
That's $9000.00/year compared to GPT-5.2 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | GPT-3.5 Turbo | GPT-5.2 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 31 | 68 | GPT-5.2 |
| Rank | #273 | #13 | GPT-5.2 |
| Quality Rank | #273 | #13 | GPT-5.2 |
| Adoption Rank | #273 | #13 | GPT-5.2 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 16K | 400K | GPT-5.2 |
| Pricing | $0.50/$1.50/M | $1.75/$14.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 43 | 86 | GPT-5.2 |
| Context window size | 67 | 89 | GPT-5.2 |
| Output Capacity | 60 | 85 | GPT-5.2 |
| Pricing Tier | 2 | 14 | GPT-5.2 |
| Recency | 0 | 100 | GPT-5.2 |
| Versatility | 33 | 67 | GPT-5.2 |
GPT-5.2 clearly outperforms GPT-3.5 Turbo with a significant 37.900000000000006-point lead. For most general use cases, GPT-5.2 is the stronger choice. However, GPT-3.5 Turbo may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
GPT-3.5 Turbo
87% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
GPT-3.5 Turbo
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
GPT-5.2 currently scores higher (68 vs 31), but the best choice depends on your specific use case, budget, and requirements.
GPT-3.5 Turbo is ranked #273 and GPT-5.2 is ranked #13. Rankings are based on a composite score from multiple signals including benchmarks, community sentiment, and adoption metrics.
Compare the detailed pricing breakdown above to see which model offers better value for your usage pattern.