Head-to-head comparison

GLM-5.2 vs. GLM-5.1

Compare published benchmark results from matching versions and cohorts, API pricing, and technical specifications. Any documented test setup differences remain visible.

shared result series: 168
distinct benchmarks: 18
latest retrieval: 2026-09-04

First modelSecond model

Specifications

General specifications

Release date, availability, context window, architecture, and published parameter counts at a glance. Undisclosed details remain marked as unavailable.

Specifications for GLM-5.2 and GLM-5.1
Attribute	GLM-5.2	GLM-5.1
Provider	Z.ai	Z.ai
Released	Jun 16, 2026	Apr 7, 2026
Availability	Open Source	Open Source
Model type	Open Weights	Open Weights
Parameters	744B, 40B active	744B, 40B active
Architecture	Mixture of Experts	Mixture of Experts
Context window	1,000,000 tokens	200,000 tokens
Knowledge cutoff	Not published	Not published
Technical sources	Model, Context	Model, Context

Pricing

API pricing compared

The table compares official standard API rates per 1M tokens, including published cache pricing. Batch, fast, priority, regional surcharges, tool calls, and cloud platform pricing are excluded.

API pricing for GLM-5.2 and GLM-5.1
Price type	GLM-5.2	GLM-5.1
API input	$1.4	$1.4
API output	$4.4	$4.4
Cache read	$0.26	$0.26
Cache write (5 min.)	Not listed	Not listed
Cache write (1 hr.)	Not listed	Not listed
Price verified	07/30/2026 Source	07/30/2026 Source

GLM-5.2GLM-5.1

API inputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

GLM-5.2$1.4

GLM-5.1$1.4

API outputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

GLM-5.2$4.4

GLM-5.1$4.4

Cache readUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

GLM-5.2$0.26

GLM-5.1$0.26

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Pricing by provider

Direct developer pricing and provider endpoint tariffs routed through OpenRouter are listed separately. Prices are in USD per 1M tokens. Context-dependent direct tiers plus regional, Flex, Priority, and other OpenRouter tariffs remain individually identifiable.

Provider pricing for GLM-5.2 and GLM-5.1
Model	Provider	Purchase route and tariff	Input per 1M tokens	Output per 1M tokens	Source
GLM-5.2	Z.ai	Direct from developerStandard API	$1.4	$4.4	Source07/30/2026
	Alibaba	Via OpenRouteralibaba/fast	$2.31	$7.26	Source09/07/2026
	Alibaba	Via OpenRouteralibaba/fp8	$0.966	$3.036	Source09/07/2026
	Ambient	Via OpenRouterambient/fp8	$0.6	$2	Source09/07/2026
	AtlasCloud	Via OpenRouteratlas-cloud/fp8	$0.938	$2.948	Source09/07/2026
	Baidu	Via OpenRouterbaidu/fp8	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	BaseTen	Via OpenRouterbaseten/fast#1	$2.1	$6.6	Source09/07/2026
	BaseTen	Via OpenRouterbaseten/fast#2	$2.1	$6.6	Source09/07/2026
	BaseTen	Via OpenRouterbaseten/fp8#1	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	BaseTen	Via OpenRouterbaseten/fp8#2	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Cloudflare	Via OpenRoutercloudflare	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	CoreWeave	Via OpenRoutercoreweave/fp4	$0.76	$2.42	Source09/07/2026
	Crusoe	Via OpenRoutercrusoe/fp8	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Decart	Via OpenRouterdecart/fast	$1.26	$3.96	Source09/07/2026
	Decart	Via OpenRouterdecart/fp4	$0.684	$2.28	Source09/07/2026
	DeepInfra	Via OpenRouterdeepinfra/fp4	Lowest listed price: $0.4875	Lowest listed price: $1.56	Source09/07/2026
	DigitalOcean	Via OpenRouterdigitalocean	$0.7	$2.2	Source09/07/2026
	Fireworks	Via OpenRouterfireworks	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Fireworks	Via OpenRouterfireworks/fast	$2.1	$6.6	Source09/07/2026
	Fireworks	Via OpenRouterfireworks/fast-us	$2.1	$6.6	Source09/07/2026
	Friendli	Via OpenRouterfriendli	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	GMICloud	Via OpenRoutergmicloud/fp8	$1.05	$3.3	Source09/07/2026
	Inceptron	Via OpenRouterinceptron/fp4	$1.25	$2.99	Source09/07/2026
	Mistral	Via OpenRoutermistral	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Mistral	Via OpenRoutermistral/eu	$1.54	$4.84	Source09/07/2026
	Mistral	Via OpenRoutermistral/zdr	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Novita	Via OpenRouternovita/fp8	$0.5586	$1.7556	Source09/07/2026
	Parasail	Via OpenRouterparasail/fp4	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Phala	Via OpenRouterphala/fp8	$1.26	$3	Source09/07/2026
	SiliconFlow	Via OpenRoutersiliconflow/fp8	$1.19	$3.74	Source09/07/2026
	StreamLake	Via OpenRouterstreamlake/fp8	$0.5446	$1.7116	Source09/07/2026
	Together	Via OpenRoutertogether	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Venice	Via OpenRoutervenice/fp8	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Z.AI	Via OpenRouterz-ai/fp8	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
GLM-5.1	Z.ai	Direct from developerStandard API	$1.4	$4.4	Source07/30/2026
	Alibaba	Via OpenRouteralibaba/fp8	$1.33	$4.18	Source09/07/2026
	AtlasCloud	Via OpenRouteratlas-cloud/fp8	$1.26	$3.96	Source09/07/2026
	Baidu	Via OpenRouterbaidu/fp8	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Chutes	Via OpenRouterchutes/fp8	$0.98	$3.08	Source09/07/2026
	Crusoe	Via OpenRoutercrusoe/fp8	$1.2	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	DeepInfra	Via OpenRouterdeepinfra/fp4	$1.05	$3.5	Source09/07/2026
	DigitalOcean	Via OpenRouterdigitalocean	$1.3	$4.3	Source09/07/2026
	Friendli	Via OpenRouterfriendli	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	GMICloud	Via OpenRoutergmicloud/fp8	Lowest listed price: $0.91	Lowest listed price: $2.86	Source09/07/2026
	Nebius	Via OpenRouternebius/fp8	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Novita	Via OpenRouternovita/fp8	$1.38	$4.4	Source09/07/2026
	Phala	Via OpenRouterphala	$1.21	$4.2	Source09/07/2026
	SiliconFlow	Via OpenRoutersiliconflow/fp8	$1.19	$3.74	Source09/07/2026
	StreamLake	Via OpenRouterstreamlake/fp8	$0.966	$3.036	Source09/07/2026
	Venice	Via OpenRoutervenice/fp8	$1.54	$4.84	Source09/07/2026
	Z.AI	Via OpenRouterz-ai/fp8	$1.4	$4.4	Source09/07/2026

Performance

Shared benchmarks

Only published results with the same benchmark version, task, metric, and comparison cohort are paired. Different reasoning levels, agents, harnesses, or output limits appear directly in the table.

Capability profile from matched benchmarks

Each axis averages directly matched benchmark families. A value of 100 means the stronger value within this pair, not a universal quality score.

GLM-5.2

GLM-5.1

Coding: 96.6 / 61.9 (5 benchmark families)

Reasoning: 99 / 97.8 (1 benchmark family)

Knowledge: 99.5 / 99.7 (1 benchmark family)

Finance: 99.9 / 95.1 (3 benchmark families)

Legal: 99.8 / 63 (3 benchmark families)

Agentic tasks: 100 / 84 (1 benchmark family)

Health: 99 / 93.3 (2 benchmark families)

Overall: 100 / 79.7 (1 benchmark family)

59 matched rows from 17 benchmark families were considered. The radar shows 8 of 8 comparable categories.

GLM-5.2GLM-5.1

Code MigrationOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.237.87 %

GLM-5.125.768 %

CorpFin v2Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.266.123 %

GLM-5.164.452 %

Finance Agent (v2)Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.249.699 %

GLM-5.144.792 %

GPQA DiamondOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.285.606 %

GLM-5.184.518 %

Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkOverall · Task fully resolved. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.27.083 %

GLM-5.10 %

Legal Research BenchOverall · All-pass. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.231.25 %

GLM-5.127.885 %

LegalBenchOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.284.073 %

GLM-5.184.394 %

LiveCodeBench v6Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.269.5 %

GLM-5.181.38 %

LMArena Text, Style ControlOverall. Higher is better. Test setup not documented as identical

GLM-5.21,471.886

GLM-5.11,466.019

MedCodeOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.240.771 %

GLM-5.141.604 %

MedScribeOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.283.534 %

GLM-5.172.27 %

MMLU-ProOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

GLM-5.286.714 %

GLM-5.186.9 %

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Benchmark scores for GLM-5.2 and GLM-5.1
Benchmark and task	GLM-5.2	GLM-5.1	Source
Code MigrationOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner37.87 %	25.768 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/03/2026
CorpFin v2Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner66.123 %	64.452 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/12/2026
Finance Agent (v2)Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner49.699 %	44.792 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/03/2026
GPQA DiamondOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner85.606 %	84.518 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkOverall · Task fully resolved Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: task resolution rateScoring: Higher is better	Winner7.083 %	0 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/03/2026
Legal Research BenchOverall · All-pass Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: all-pass rateScoring: Higher is better	Winner31.25 %	27.885 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/03/2026
LegalBenchOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	84.073 %	Winner84.394 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
LiveCodeBench v6Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	69.5 %	Winner81.38 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
LMArena Text, Style ControlOverall Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: style-control-v1Metric: style-controlled Bradley-Terry ratingScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Snapshot: glm-5.2-max, Reasoning: max, Harness: Arena text, style control GLM-5.1: Snapshot: glm-5.1, Harness: Arena text, style controlGLM-5.2: Style-controlled Arena rating from 33,758 anonymous pairwise votes.GLM-5.1: Style-controlled Arena rating from 45,403 anonymous pairwise votes.	Higher measured value1,471.886 95% confidence interval: ±4.729The Arena score measures human preference rather than a fixed capability test. The confidence interval and model configuration are part of the result.	1,466.019 95% confidence interval: ±3.982The Arena score measures human preference rather than a fixed capability test. The confidence interval and model configuration are part of the result.	LMArena Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
MedCodeOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	40.771 %	Winner41.604 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/03/2026
MedScribeOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner83.534 %	72.27 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/03/2026
MMLU-ProOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	86.714 %	Winner86.9 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
ProgramBenchOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner0.5 %	0 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
SWE-bench VerifiedOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner82.8 %	76.4 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
TaxEval v2Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner73.344 %	71.194 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
Terminal-Bench 2.1Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner67.79 %	56.929 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/03/2026
Vals IndexCorpFin v2 Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1.2Metric: benchmark scoreScoring: Higher is better	Winner66.317 %	65.268 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterSettings: Harness: OpenHands	Winner63.961 %	31.456 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/03/2026
Code MigrationCLI Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value27.16 %	18.833 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
CorpFin v2Exact Pages Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner63.636 %	61.772 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Finance Agent (v2)Adjustments Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner46.305 %	43.276 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
GPQA DiamondFew-Shot CoT Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	83.333 %	Winner85.787 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkAntitrust Competition · Criteria passed Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: criteria pass rateScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value87.319 %	71.377 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/07/2026
Legal Research BenchAdministrative / Regulatory · All-pass Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: all-pass rateScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value39.394 %	31.818 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
LegalBenchConclusion Tasks Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	88.587 %	Winner89.575 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
LiveCodeBench v6Easy Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	97.205 %	Winner98.754 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
LMArena Text, Style ControlBusiness, management and finance Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: style-control-v1Metric: style-controlled Bradley-Terry ratingScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Snapshot: glm-5.2-max, Reasoning: max, Harness: Arena text, style control GLM-5.1: Snapshot: glm-5.1, Harness: Arena text, style controlGLM-5.2: Style-controlled Arena rating from 6,609 anonymous pairwise votes.GLM-5.1: Style-controlled Arena rating from 9,036 anonymous pairwise votes.	1,460.145 95% confidence interval: ±8.046The Arena score measures human preference rather than a fixed capability test. The confidence interval and model configuration are part of the result.	Higher measured value1,464.877 95% confidence interval: ±7.07The Arena score measures human preference rather than a fixed capability test. The confidence interval and model configuration are part of the result.	LMArena Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
MMLU-ProBiology Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner94.003 %	93.724 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
ProgramBenchAlmost Resolved Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 1, Output limit: 64,000 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value9.5 %	1 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
SWE-bench Verified<15 min fix Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	88.144 %	Higher measured value88.66 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/08/2026
TaxEval v2Correctness Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner62.061 %	61.538 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
Terminal-Bench 2.1Easy Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 2.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 1, Output limit: 48,000 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value100 %	83.333 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Vals IndexFinance Agent v2 Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1.2Metric: benchmark scoreScoring: Higher is better	Winner50.83 %	44.79 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
Code MigrationCOBOL Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value70 %	46.571 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
CorpFin v2Max Fitting Context Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner68.415 %	66.317 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Finance Agent (v2)All-Pass Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner38.006 %	32.68 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
GPQA DiamondZero-Shot CoT Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner87.879 %	83.249 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkAntitrust Competition · Task fully resolved Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: task resolution rateScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	No direct winner0 %	No direct winner0 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/07/2026
Legal Research BenchAdministrative / Regulatory · Weighted partial credit Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: weighted partial-credit scoreScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value85.95 %	80.005 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
LegalBenchInterpretation Tasks Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner82.17 %	81.709 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
LiveCodeBench v6Hard Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	37.143 %	Winner57.429 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
LMArena Text, Style ControlChinese Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: style-control-v1Metric: style-controlled Bradley-Terry ratingScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Snapshot: glm-5.2-max, Reasoning: max, Harness: Arena text, style control GLM-5.1: Snapshot: glm-5.1, Harness: Arena text, style controlGLM-5.2: Style-controlled Arena rating from 2,084 anonymous pairwise votes.GLM-5.1: Style-controlled Arena rating from 2,742 anonymous pairwise votes.	Higher measured value1,516.828 95% confidence interval: ±13.481The Arena score measures human preference rather than a fixed capability test. The confidence interval and model configuration are part of the result.	1,516.722 95% confidence interval: ±12.084The Arena score measures human preference rather than a fixed capability test. The confidence interval and model configuration are part of the result.	LMArena Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
MMLU-ProBusiness Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner91.888 %	91.128 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
ProgramBenchFully Resolved Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 1, Output limit: 64,000 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value0.5 %	0 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
SWE-bench Verified>4 hours Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value66.667 %	33.333 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/08/2026
TaxEval v2Stepwise Reasoning Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner84.628 %	80.851 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
Terminal-Bench 2.1Hard Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 2.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 1, Output limit: 48,000 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value51.111 %	37.778 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Vals IndexSWE-bench Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1.2Metric: benchmark scoreScoring: Higher is better	Winner83.333 %	72.549 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
Code MigrationCode Quality Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: mean reviewer code-quality ratingScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value3.981 / 5	3.544 / 5	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
CorpFin v2Shared Max Context Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner66.317 %	65.268 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Finance Agent (v2)Comparables Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner44.78 %	41.557 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkArbitration International Dispute Resolution · Criteria passed Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: criteria pass rateScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value91.756 %	53.405 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/07/2026
Legal Research BenchBusiness & Commercial · All-pass Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: all-pass rateScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value27.907 %	23.256 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
LegalBenchIssue Tasks Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner89.506 %	89.02 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
LiveCodeBench v6Medium Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	74.151 %	Winner87.958 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
LMArena Text, Style ControlCoding Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: style-control-v1Metric: style-controlled Bradley-Terry ratingScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Snapshot: glm-5.2-max, Reasoning: max, Harness: Arena text, style control GLM-5.1: Snapshot: glm-5.1, Harness: Arena text, style controlGLM-5.2: Style-controlled Arena rating from 9,517 anonymous pairwise votes.GLM-5.1: Style-controlled Arena rating from 12,659 anonymous pairwise votes.	1,509.051 95% confidence interval: ±7.106The Arena score measures human preference rather than a fixed capability test. The confidence interval and model configuration are part of the result.	Higher measured value1,513.669 95% confidence interval: ±6.252The Arena score measures human preference rather than a fixed capability test. The confidence interval and model configuration are part of the result.	LMArena Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
MMLU-ProChemistry Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	91.608 %	Winner91.844 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
ProgramBenchRaw Pass Rate Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 1, Output limit: 64,000 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value62.605 %	50.879 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
SWE-bench Verified1-4 hours Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value66.667 %	45.238 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/08/2026
Terminal-Bench 2.1Medium Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 2.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 1, Output limit: 48,000 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value74.545 %	65.455 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Vals IndexTerminal-Bench 2.1 Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1.2Metric: benchmark scoreScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Top P: 1, Output limit: 48,000 tokens	Higher measured value67.79 %	56.929 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/09/2026
Finance Agent (v2)Disclosure Analysis Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner61.588 %	52.713 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkArbitration International Dispute Resolution · Task fully resolved Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: task resolution rateScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	No direct winner0 %	No direct winner0 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/07/2026
Legal Research BenchBusiness & Commercial · Weighted partial credit Test details Test setup not documented as identicalNo direct winnerVersion: 1Metric: weighted partial-credit scoreScoring: Higher is betterGLM-5.2: Reasoning: max, Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens GLM-5.1: Temperature: 1, Top P: 0.95, Output limit: 131,072 tokens	Higher measured value87.466 %	81.655 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/06/2026
Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

How to read this comparison

Winning one benchmark is not an overall verdict

Your workload, budget, and required context length matter most. A coding benchmark says little about visual understanding or agent performance.

The standard price table uses direct developer rates. The provider comparison labels OpenRouter endpoints, regions, and special tariffs separately.

Every result links to its measurement source and retrieval date. Labels distinguish vendor reports, official benchmark leaderboards, and independent evaluations. Disputed or archived results are excluded.

More matchups

Compare GLM-5.2 and GLM-5.1 with other leading models using the same data and benchmark logic.

View the complete LLM comparison