| Signal | GPT-5.2 | Delta | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 86 | -- | |
Context window size | 89 | -11 | |
Output Capacity | 85 | +11 | |
Pricing Tier | 14 | +14 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Versatility | 67 | +17 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 1 wins |
25
days ranked higher
0
days
5
days ranked higher
OpenAI
xAI
Grok 4.1 Fast saves you $830.00/month
That's $9960.00/year compared to GPT-5.2 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | GPT-5.2 | Grok 4.1 Fast | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 68 | 64 | GPT-5.2 |
| Rank | #13 | #34 | GPT-5.2 |
| Quality Rank | #13 | #34 | GPT-5.2 |
| Adoption Rank | #13 | #34 | GPT-5.2 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 400K | 2000K | Grok 4.1 Fast |
| Pricing | $1.75/$14.00/M | $0.20/$0.50/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 86 | 86 | GPT-5.2 |
| Context window size | 89 | 100 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
| Output Capacity | 85 | 75 | GPT-5.2 |
| Pricing Tier | 14 | 1 | GPT-5.2 |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | GPT-5.2 |
| Versatility | 67 | 50 | GPT-5.2 |
GPT-5.2 has a moderate advantage with a 4.400000000000006-point lead in composite score. It wins on more signal dimensions, but Grok 4.1 Fast has specific strengths that could make it the better choice for certain workflows.
Best for Quality
GPT-5.2
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Grok 4.1 Fast
96% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
GPT-5.2
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
GPT-5.2
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
GPT-5.2
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
GPT-5.2 currently scores higher (68 vs 64), but the best choice depends on your specific use case, budget, and requirements.
GPT-5.2 is ranked #13 and Grok 4.1 Fast is ranked #34. 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.