Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.2 Codex
Claude Opus 4.6 (2026) and GPT-5.2 Codex (2025) compare a standalone API model against a coding-specialized model. Claude Opus 4.6 ships a 1m-token context window, while GPT-5.2 Codex ships a 400k-token context window. On SWE-bench Verified, Claude Opus 4.6 leads by 8 pts. On pricing, GPT-5.2 Codex costs $1.75/1M input tokens versus $5/1M for the alternative. This page treats the result as workflow and deployment fit, not a universal model winner.
Treat this as a product-type comparison: Claude Opus 4.6 is standalone API model, while GPT-5.2 Codex is coding-specialized model. Choose based on workflow fit before reading any benchmark or price row as decisive.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Product type | Standalone API model | Coding-specialized model |
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents | custom coding agents, code generation, and tool loops |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 1m | 400k |
| Cheapest output | $25/1M tokens | $14/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 6 tracked | 2 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | SWE-bench Verified leader | 3 shared |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Opus 4.6 holds a shared-benchmark lead on SWE-bench Verified, ahead by 8 points.
- Claude Opus 4.6 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Claude Opus 4.6 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Local decision data tags Claude Opus 4.6 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- GPT-5.2 Codex holds a shared-benchmark lead on SWE-bench Pro, ahead by 3 points.
- GPT-5.2 Codex has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $14/1M tokens.
- Local decision data tags GPT-5.2 Codex for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Claude Opus 4.6
$10,250
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Anthropic
GPT-5.2 Codex
$4,900
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Vercel AI Gateway
Estimated monthly gap: $5,350. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on Vercel AI Gateway; start route-level A/B tests there.
- GPT-5.2 Codex is $11/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Provider overlap exists on Vercel AI Gateway; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Opus 4.6 is $11/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-02-05 | 2025-12-18 |
| Context window | 1m | 400k |
| Parameters | — | — |
| Architecture | Decoder Only | Decoder Only |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Openness | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Weights | Not released | Not released |
| Code | Unknown | Unknown |
| Commercial use | Commercial use: conditional | Commercial use: conditional |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-12 | 2025-08 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $5/1M tokens | $1.75/1M tokens |
| Output price | $25/1M tokens | $14/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | Yes |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.8 | 72.8 |
| SWE-bench Pro | 53.4 | 56.4 |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 65.4 | 64.0 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, SWE-bench Verified has Claude Opus 4.6 at 80.8 and GPT-5.2 Codex at 72.8, with Claude Opus 4.6 ahead by 8 points; SWE-bench Pro has Claude Opus 4.6 at 53.4 and GPT-5.2 Codex at 56.4, with GPT-5.2 Codex ahead by 3 points; Terminal-Bench 2.0 has Claude Opus 4.6 at 65.4 and GPT-5.2 Codex at 64, with Claude Opus 4.6 ahead by 1.4 points. The largest visible gap is 8 points on SWE-bench Verified, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint is close: both models cover vision, multimodal input, reasoning mode, function calling, and tool use. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.
For cost, Claude Opus 4.6 lists $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while GPT-5.2 Codex lists $1.75/1M input and $14/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts GPT-5.2 Codex lower by about $5.58 per million blended tokens. Availability is 6 providers versus 2, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Opus 4.6 when coding workflow support, larger context windows, and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose GPT-5.2 Codex when coding workflow support and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2 Codex?
Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1m tokens, while GPT-5.2 Codex supports 400k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2 Codex?
GPT-5.2 Codex is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens. GPT-5.2 Codex costs $1.75/1M input and $14/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2 Codex open source?
Claude Opus 4.6 is listed under Proprietary. GPT-5.2 Codex is listed under Proprietary. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2 Codex?
Both Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.2 Codex expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is better for multimodal input, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2 Codex?
Both Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.2 Codex expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Where can I run Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.2 Codex?
Claude Opus 4.6 is available on Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, GCP Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, and OpenRouter. GPT-5.2 Codex is available on Vercel AI Gateway and OpenAI API. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.2
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs GPT-5.2 Codex
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs GLM-5.1
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
- DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GPT-5.2 Codex
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs Hunyuan Hy3 Preview
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs Composer 2.5
- Claude Opus 4.6 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash
Popular comparisons for Claude Opus 4.6
Popular comparisons for GPT-5.2 Codex
Last reviewed: 2026-07-20. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.