GPT-5.2 vs Ternary Bonsai 27B
At a Glance
| Compare |  GPT-5.2OpenAI |  Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #33 of 4649.3 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #28 of 44$0.161 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #34 of 3844.0 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $1.75Openai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | Not reported |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $14.00Openai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | Not reported |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 400K | 262K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 18, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | GPT-5.2 | Ternary Bonsai 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | OpenAI | PrismML |
| Family | Gpt 5 2 | Bonsai 27b |
| Model | GPT-5.2 | Ternary Bonsai 27B |
| Version | GPT-5.2 | Ternary Bonsai 27B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2025-12-11 | 2026-07-04 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-08-31 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 400K | 262K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 27B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | apache-2.0 |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Openai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) | Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools, vision |
| Base model | Unknown | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Effective bit width | Unknown | 1.58 bits per weight |
| Language model size | Unknown | 6.66 GiB |
| Weight format | Unknown | Ternary Q2_0 |
GPT-5.2 Capabilities
Ternary Bonsai 27B Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
GPT-5.2OpenAI | vs | GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.2OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | GPT-5.2OpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | GPT-5.2OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
GPT-5.2OpenAI | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
GPT-5.2OpenAI | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | vs | GPT-5.2OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | GPT-5.2OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
GPT-5.2OpenAI | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
GPT-5.2OpenAI | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | GPT-5.2OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | vs | GPT-5.2OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
GPT-5.2 vs Ternary Bonsai 27B FAQs
Is GPT-5.2 or Ternary Bonsai 27B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both GPT-5.2 and Ternary Bonsai 27B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 or Ternary Bonsai 27B?+
Only GPT-5.2 has a directly sourced input price: $1.75 per million tokens. Only GPT-5.2 has a directly sourced output price: $14.00 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, GPT-5.2 or Ternary Bonsai 27B?+
GPT-5.2 has the larger sourced context window. GPT-5.2 supports 400K and Ternary Bonsai 27B supports 262K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, GPT-5.2 or Ternary Bonsai 27B?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can GPT-5.2 or Ternary Bonsai 27B be self-hosted?+
Ternary Bonsai 27B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. GPT-5.2 is not marked open weight; Ternary Bonsai 27B is open weight.
Can GPT-5.2 and Ternary Bonsai 27B understand images?+
GPT-5.2 is documented with image input; Ternary Bonsai 27B is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, GPT-5.2 or Ternary Bonsai 27B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. GPT-5.2 is 128K and Ternary Bonsai 27B is —.
Do GPT-5.2 and Ternary Bonsai 27B support reasoning and tool use?+
GPT-5.2: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Ternary Bonsai 27B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, GPT-5.2 or Ternary Bonsai 27B?+
GPT-5.2 has 2 sourced provider routes; Ternary Bonsai 27B has 1, so GPT-5.2 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, GPT-5.2 or Ternary Bonsai 27B?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.