| Signal | Gemini 3 Flash Preview | Delta | GPT-5.2-Codex |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 83 | -17 | |
Pricing | 3 | -11 | |
Context window size | 96 | +7 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 80 | -5 | |
| Overall Result | 1 wins | of 5 | 3 wins |
0
days ranked higher
0
days
30
days ranked higher
OpenAI
Gemini 3 Flash Preview saves you $675.00/month
That's $8100.00/year compared to GPT-5.2-Codex at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Gemini 3 Flash Preview | GPT-5.2-Codex | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 89 | 96 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
| Rank | #30 | #9 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
| Quality Rank | #30 | #9 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
| Adoption Rank | #30 | #9 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1049K | 400K | Gemini 3 Flash Preview |
| Pricing | $0.50/$3.00/M | $1.75/$14.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 83 | 100 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
| Pricing | 3 | 14 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
| Context window size | 96 | 89 | Gemini 3 Flash Preview |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Gemini 3 Flash Preview |
| Output Capacity | 80 | 85 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 89/100 (rank #30), placing it in the top 90% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 96/100 (rank #9), placing it in the top 97% of all 290 models tracked.
GPT-5.2-Codex has a 7-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably better performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Gemini 3 Flash Preview offers 78% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $52.50/month with Gemini 3 Flash Preview vs $236.25/month with GPT-5.2-Codex — a $183.75 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Gemini 3 Flash Preview also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($3.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (96/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input — can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
GPT-5.2-Codex has a moderate advantage with a 6.799999999999997-point lead in composite score. It wins on more signal dimensions, but Gemini 3 Flash Preview has specific strengths that could make it the better choice for certain workflows.
Best for Quality
Gemini 3 Flash Preview
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Gemini 3 Flash Preview
78% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Gemini 3 Flash Preview
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Gemini 3 Flash Preview
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Gemini 3 Flash Preview
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Google
| Capability | Gemini 3 Flash Preview | GPT-5.2-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
Gemini 3 Flash Preview saves you $15.45/month
That's 77% cheaper than GPT-5.2-Codex at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Gemini 3 Flash Preview | GPT-5.2-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1.0M | 400K |
| Max Output Tokens | 65,536 | 128,000 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Dec 17, 2025 | Jan 14, 2026 |
GPT-5.2-Codex scores 96/100 (rank #9) compared to Gemini 3 Flash Preview's 89/100 (rank #30), giving it a 7-point advantage. GPT-5.2-Codex is the stronger overall choice, though Gemini 3 Flash Preview may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Gemini 3 Flash Preview is ranked #30 and GPT-5.2-Codex is ranked #9 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
Gemini 3 Flash Preview is cheaper at $3.00/M output tokens vs GPT-5.2-Codex's $14.00/M output tokens — 4.7x more expensive. Input token pricing: Gemini 3 Flash Preview at $0.50/M vs GPT-5.2-Codex at $1.75/M.
Gemini 3 Flash Preview has a larger context window of 1,048,576 tokens compared to GPT-5.2-Codex's 400,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.