a real‑world empty‑repo one‑shot build comparing gpt‑5.2 vs gpt‑5.1 codex max on a full multi‑page dentist website.
share this post
stay in the loop
When we publish new experiments or playbooks, we’ll send you the highlights so you can apply them faster.
Your feedback helps us improve how we deliver practical playbooks.
Productized execution
For dental operators, the highest leverage is improving trust, speed, and booking confidence across web search, AI discovery, and your team’s internal workflow.
Keep learning
More experiments and playbooks from the Prism team.
work with prism to apply these steps to your brand—fast, focused, and measured.
By Enzo Sison — Founder, Prism
most founders don’t care about “benchmarks.”
they care about one thing:
can i ship a clean, trustworthy website (opens in a new tab) that brings in leads — without spending weeks in dev hell?
so i ran a real-world test.
i used the same challenge we used in our last episode: start with a completely empty repo and ask an ai model to build a full business website from scratch — in one shot.
this time, we tested gpt (opens in a new tab)‑5.2.
here’s the simplest version of the test:
quick safety note: if you ever run agentic tooling with “full access,” do it in a throwaway repo and review every change. never expose api keys in recordings or screenshots.
gpt‑5.2 runtime: 16 minutes 27 seconds
(our prior run with gpt‑5.1 codex max took ~10 minutes)
so yeah — it’s slower.
and i’m not talking “barely better.”
i’m talking: visibly better design quality the moment the site loads.
specifically, what stood out:
mobile layout looked good.
and the surprise: the “weird middle size window” test (where a lot of ai-generated sites fall apart) still looked solid.
the build wasn’t just a landing page. it generated a real structure:
is it “production-ready”? not automatically. but it’s not a toy either.
here’s the blunt truth:
the footer had the main visible design errors.
everything else looked surprisingly clean for a one-shot build.
there were also a couple moments where blog navigation felt a little buggy / inconsistent — not catastrophic, but noticeable.
and i couldn’t pull up a sitemap view in the moment (not a dealbreaker, but it matters if you care about indexing + internal linking).
this is what the run made obvious:
if you’re a founder, that tradeoff is familiar:
you can ship fast, or you can ship clean.
what’s new is that ai is starting to let you do both — if you validate the output like a pro.
if you run a local business (dentist, law firm, med spa, home services, etc.), your website’s job is simple:
ai can now get you 70% of the way there fast.
but that last 30% is where money is made (or lost).
because founders don’t lose leads from “the repo wasn’t elegant.”
they lose leads because:
ai won’t reliably handle all of that out of the box.
so here’s the right mental model:
use ai to generate the first draft. use professionals (and a checklist) to make it convert.
if you’re going to use ai output for a real business site, run this checklist:
based on what i saw, the fast path to production quality would be:
that’s the difference between a “cool demo” and a “site that prints leads.”
gpt‑5.2 is a real step up for one-shot website generation.
it took longer — but the design quality and the lack of front-end errors made it worth it.
if you want to mess around with this yourself, do it.
but if you want the outcome that actually matters — a fast, mobile-first website that gets you found, trusted, and chosen — that’s what we build at prism.
if you want help, reach out and we’ll map your offer, design direction, and launch plan into a site that converts.
