Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nova Pro 1.0 vs GLM 5.2

GLM 5.2 leads Nova Pro 1.0 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 33.7 to 7.0, and Nova Pro 1.0 costs 1.4x less per output token ($3.20 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Nova Pro 1.0 Replace GLM 5.2
Nova Pro 1.0Amazon
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$3.20
0
GLM 5.2Z.ai
Coding
61.1
Overall
62.5
Output $/M
$4.40
35
vs boards won of 35 shared

Nova Pro 1.0 or GLM 5.2: which to pick

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Pro 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Nova Pro 1.0 for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($3.20 vs $4.40 per million).

Model ANova Pro 1.0AmazonNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGLM 5.2Z.ai61.1/1004 independent benchmarks$0.86 per solved task
Shared results
35
Nova Pro 1.0 only
7
GLM 5.2 only
63
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Nova Pro 1.0 not benchmarked, GLM 5.2 61.1 from 4 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 85.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Nova Pro 1.0 14.0% against GLM 5.2 99.1%, 85.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nova Pro 1.0 $3.20 against GLM 5.2 $4.40 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
Context window
Nova Pro 1.0 takes 300K tokens, GLM 5.2 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryNova Pro 1.0BarsGLM 5.2Ties
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge04
Web design01
General018
All shared boards035
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1604Only GLM 5.2 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured68.8Only GLM 5.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured69.5%Only GLM 5.2 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured82.8%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured64.0%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured37.9%Only GLM 5.2 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured67.8%Only GLM 5.2 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured45.1%Only GLM 5.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)23.3%Not measuredOnly Nova Pro 1.0 measured
SciCodeNot measured51.2%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)6.1%50.8%GLM 5.2
FrontierCodeNot measured24.5%Only GLM 5.2 measured
WeirdMLNot measured70.1%Only GLM 5.2 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1047.0Only GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: coding12701487GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: software and IT12711486GLM 5.2
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1617Only GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1565Only GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
AA Intelligence Index7.033.7GLM 5.2
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured151.9Only GLM 5.2 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured38.4Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1222Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1241Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1160Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1178Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1142Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1206Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1175Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1195Only GLM 5.2 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured49.7%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured31.3%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured61.5%Only GLM 5.2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom14.0%99.1%GLM 5.2
APEX-AgentsNot measured45.2%Only GLM 5.2 measured
PostTrainBenchNot measured31.7%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$8,314Only GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured85.6%Only GLM 5.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)49.9%89.5%GLM 5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.2%41.1%GLM 5.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured91.9%Only GLM 5.2 measured
ARC-AGINot measured77.0%Only GLM 5.2 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured22.8%Only GLM 5.2 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured58.8%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured22.0%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured19.0%Only GLM 5.2 measured
EBR-benchNot measured9.5%Only GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12461481GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: expert12111487GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12591481GLM 5.2
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured62.6%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
AA Math Index7.0Not measuredOnly Nova Pro 1.0 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)7.0%Not measuredOnly Nova Pro 1.0 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured86.4%Only GLM 5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured59.2%Only GLM 5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured29.3%Only GLM 5.2 measured
ProofBenchNot measured35.0%Only GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: math12521483GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: mathematical work12611489GLM 5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
MMLU ProNot measured86.7%Only GLM 5.2 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.1%Only GLM 5.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured66.1%Only GLM 5.2 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured73.3%Only GLM 5.2 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured40.8%Only GLM 5.2 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)69.1%Not measuredOnly Nova Pro 1.0 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured34.2%Only GLM 5.2 measured
MMLU82.0%Not measuredOnly Nova Pro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: science12551489GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12601475GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: legal and government12811486GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: business and finance12291451GLM 5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Web design benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
Design Arena: websites7961285GLM 5.2
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1296Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1268Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1285Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1288Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1288Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1214Only GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1190Only GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index018
General benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured83.5%Only GLM 5.2 measured
IFBench38.1%73.3%GLM 5.2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)21.0%78.3%GLM 5.2
DTBenchNot measured93.6%Only GLM 5.2 measured
LMCANot measured45.8%Only GLM 5.2 measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured55.6%Only GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text12591470GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: instruction following12351466GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: creative writing12121463GLM 5.2
LMArena Vision980Not measuredOnly Nova Pro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: English12761475GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: non-English12331459GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Chinese12441522GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: German12431470GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Japanese12001450GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Korean12031440GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: French12711479GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Spanish11821478GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Russian12401468GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1456Only GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn12461469GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: longer queries12551480GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: writing and language12471463GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12101450GLM 5.2
LMArena Vision: English987Not measuredOnly Nova Pro 1.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
BenchmarkNova Pro 1.0GLM 5.2Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Nova Pro 1.0$0.0024Fits in one request
GLM 5.2$0.0036Fits in one request

Nova Pro 1.0 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nova Pro 1.0$0.050Fits in one request
GLM 5.2$0.083Fits in one request

Nova Pro 1.0 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nova Pro 1.0$0.192Fits in one request
GLM 5.2$0.324Fits in one request

Nova Pro 1.0 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Nova Pro 1.0 and GLM 5.2
SpecificationAmazon Nova Pro 1.0Z.ai GLM 5.2
MakerAmazonZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 5, 2024June 16, 2026
Context window300K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.80$1.40
Output $/Mtok$3.20$4.40
Coding indexNot benchmarked61.1
Independent measurements behind it04
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.86
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nova Pro 1.0 better than GLM 5.2 for coding?

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Pro 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nova Pro 1.0 for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($3.20 vs $4.40 per million).

Which is cheaper, Nova Pro 1.0 or GLM 5.2?

Nova Pro 1.0 costs $0.80 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; GLM 5.2 costs $1.40 and $4.40. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Nova Pro 1.0 or GLM 5.2?

GLM 5.2, with 1.05M tokens against 300K.

How many benchmarks is the Nova Pro 1.0 vs GLM 5.2 comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Pro 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 5.2's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next