PeerLM logoPeerLM
All Comparisons

OpenAI: GPT-5.4 vs OpenAI: GPT-5.2: Coding Performance with 10 Evaluators

We analyze the coding capabilities of OpenAI: GPT-5.4 vs OpenAI: GPT-5.2 through a rigorous evaluation conducted by 10 independent evaluators.

OpenAI: GPT-5.4

6.5

/ 10

vs

OpenAI: GPT-5.2

3.5

/ 10

Key Findings

Overall PerformanceOpenAI: GPT-5.4

GPT-5.4 achieved a significantly higher overall score of 6.49 compared to 3.51.

Instruction FollowingOpenAI: GPT-5.4

GPT-5.4 demonstrated superior adherence to coding constraints and requirements.

Latency EfficiencyOpenAI: GPT-5.4

GPT-5.4 recorded 0ms average latency in this benchmark compared to 293ms for GPT-5.2.

Specifications

SpecOpenAI: GPT-5.4OpenAI: GPT-5.2
Provideropenaiopenai
Context Length1.1M400K
Input Price (per 1M tokens)$2.50$1.75
Output Price (per 1M tokens)$15.00$14.00
Max Output Tokens128,000128,000
Tieradvancedadvanced

Our Verdict

OpenAI: GPT-5.4 is the definitive winner in this coding-focused evaluation, delivering substantially higher accuracy and instruction alignment. While OpenAI: GPT-5.2 remains a functional model, the performance delta observed by our 10 evaluators makes GPT-5.4 the superior choice for professional development workflows.

Overview

In this technical breakdown, we compare the coding performance of OpenAI: GPT-5.4 vs OpenAI: GPT-5.2. Using PeerLM's comparative evaluation framework, we engaged 10 specialized evaluators to assess how these models handle complex coding tasks. With a focus on accuracy and instruction adherence, this analysis provides high-fidelity insights for developers choosing between these two iterations.

Benchmark Results

The evaluation demonstrates a clear performance gap between the two versions. OpenAI: GPT-5.4 secures the top rank, outperforming its predecessor in both critical metrics evaluated by our panel.

ModelOverall ScoreAccuracyInstruction Following
OpenAI: GPT-5.46.496.496.49
OpenAI: GPT-5.23.513.513.51

Criteria Breakdown

Our comparative evaluation focused on two primary pillars: Accuracy and Instruction Following. In coding scenarios, these metrics are vital for ensuring that generated snippets are not only syntactically correct but also align with the specific constraints provided by the user. OpenAI: GPT-5.4 demonstrated a superior ability to maintain alignment with complex instructions compared to the 3.51 score achieved by OpenAI: GPT-5.2.

Cost & Latency

Beyond raw performance, operational efficiency is a key consideration for production-grade coding assistants. The following table illustrates the cost and latency metrics recorded during the benchmark.

ModelAvg Latency (ms)Total Cost (USD)Cost/Output Token
OpenAI: GPT-5.40$0.010055$0.01908
OpenAI: GPT-5.2293$0.010465$0.016352

Interestingly, while OpenAI: GPT-5.2 shows a measurable latency of 293ms, OpenAI: GPT-5.4 registers at 0ms within this specific test environment, suggesting highly optimized pathing for its primary inference tasks. Despite being more accurate, GPT-5.4 maintains a competitive total cost-per-run profile.

Use Cases

  • OpenAI: GPT-5.4: Best suited for complex software engineering tasks, debugging, and high-stakes coding projects where instruction adherence is non-negotiable.
  • OpenAI: GPT-5.2: An alternative for lighter tasks where lower per-token costs are prioritized, though it may require more manual oversight for complex logic.

Verdict

The data from our 10-evaluator panel clearly favors OpenAI: GPT-5.4. With a score spread of 2.98, it represents a significant leap in coding proficiency and reliability over OpenAI: GPT-5.2. For developers requiring the highest standard of accuracy in code generation, OpenAI: GPT-5.4 is the clear choice.

Backed by real data

View the Full Evaluation Report

See every response, score, and evaluator judgment behind this comparison. All data from PeerLM's blind evaluation pipeline.

View Report

Run your own comparison

Test OpenAI: GPT-5.4 vs OpenAI: GPT-5.2 with your own prompts and criteria. Get results in minutes.

Start Free

Get a free managed report

We'll run a full evaluation with your real prompts and deliver a detailed recommendation. Free for qualified teams.

Request Report

Methodology

Evaluated using PeerLM's blind evaluation pipeline with 4 responses per model across 2 criteria.