LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.1 vs GPT-5.2

Updated October 21, 2026. 73 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace GLM 5.1 Replace GPT-5.2
GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
44.0
Overall
26.1
Output $/M
$4.40
49
GPT-5.2OpenAI
Coding
58.9
Overall
30.4
Output $/M
$14.00
24
vs boards won of 73 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5.2 for coding: it scores 58.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 44.0 for GLM 5.1.

Pick GLM 5.1 when output tokens cost 3.2x less, or when a solved task costs $0.60 against $1.91.

Model AGLM 5.1Z.ai44.0/1001 independent benchmark$0.60 per solved taskModel BGPT-5.2OpenAI58.9/1002 independent benchmarks$1.91 per solved task
Shared results
73
GLM 5.1 only
16
GPT-5.2 only
38
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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
GLM 5.1 44.0 from 1 benchmark, GPT-5.2 58.9 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Web design, 13.7 points apart on average over 8 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: 3D: GLM 5.1 1336 against GPT-5.2 1079, 32.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.1 $4.40 against GPT-5.2 $14.00 per million output tokens, 3.2x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.1 takes 205K tokens, GPT-5.2 400K.

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
CategoryGLM 5.1BarsGPT-5.2Ties
Coding55
Intelligence02
Agentic work61
Reasoning45
Math33
Knowledge65
Web design71
General182
All shared boards4924
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index55
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.2Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured72.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured66.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena WebDev15081417GLM 5.1
AA Coding Index55.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.4%85.4%GPT-5.2
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)76.4%75.8%GLM 5.1
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)31.5%53.5%GPT-5.2
Code migration (Vals AI)25.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)56.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured89.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SciCode44.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.2%47.0%GPT-5.2
Terminal-BenchNot measured64.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured27.5%Only GPT-5.2 measured
WeirdML57.1%72.2%GPT-5.2
ALE-Bench887.11293.5GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: coding14851442GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14841434GLM 5.1
LMArena WebDev: React1505Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML15081427GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.2Leader
AA Intelligence Index26.130.4GPT-5.2
Epoch Capabilities Index149.8153.7GPT-5.2
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.2Leader
AA Agentic Index23.9Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps11751086GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps11671043GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps11621094GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building Android apps11861064GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building Godot games10531142GPT-5.2
Design Arena: agents building games1164Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1170Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1189Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1315Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)44.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)27.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom97.7%84.8%GLM 5.1
APEX-Agents40.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
METR time horizonsNot measured75.3%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Remote Labor IndexNot measured2.5%Only GPT-5.2 measured
GDPvalNot measured49.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured41.1%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,634$3,591GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index45
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.2Leader
GPQA Diamond84.5%91.7%GPT-5.2
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured86.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.8%90.3%GPT-5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)30.1%37.7%GPT-5.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)89.9%91.4%GPT-5.2
ARC-AGINot measured86.2%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured52.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleBench55.1%45.8%GLM 5.1
Chess puzzles20.0%48.0%GPT-5.2
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured23.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
EBR-benchNot measured23.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
VPCTNot measured84.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14731428GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: expert14781445GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14821431GLM 5.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1265Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1276Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index33
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.2Leader
AIME91.9%96.9%GPT-5.2
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured94.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured99.0Only GPT-5.2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured99.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
OTIS Mock AIME93.3%96.1%GPT-5.2
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 336.8%67.4%GPT-5.2
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured31.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ProofBench22.2%15.0%GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: math14731440GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work14701442GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index65
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.2Leader
MMLU Pro86.9%86.2%GLM 5.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.4%82.8%GLM 5.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.5%66.0%GPT-5.2
CorpFin (Vals AI)64.5%65.9%GPT-5.2
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.2%75.8%GPT-5.2
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured67.1%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured94.1%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.6%49.8%GPT-5.2
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured87.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleQA Verified34.0%37.1%GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: science14781425GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14741425GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14651427GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14521414GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index71
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.2Leader
Design Arena: websites12901196GLM 5.1
Design Arena: UI components12921190GLM 5.1
Design Arena: game dev12651196GLM 5.1
Design Arena: data viz13661202GLM 5.1
Design Arena: 3D13361079GLM 5.1
Design Arena: all code categories12681171GLM 5.1
Design Arena: SVG12171137GLM 5.1
Design Arena: ASCII art11421153GPT-5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index182
General benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.2Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured49.3%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)72.3%84.4%GPT-5.2
IFBench76.3%75.4%GLM 5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.7%82.7%GPT-5.2
DTBenchNot measured90.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMCANot measured43.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
CL-benchNot measured18.2%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured38.3%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ExploitBench18.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text14631416GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14531409GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14531376GLM 5.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1246Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: English14761422GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: non-English14481405GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Chinese15151447GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: German14671444GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Japanese14351420GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Korean14241374GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: French14701454GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Spanish14681413GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Russian14541415GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Polish14491426GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: multi-turn14731419GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14671413GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14541392GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14421378GLM 5.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1243Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1305Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1257Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1227Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1267Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1232Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1225Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1405Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-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

GLM 5.1$0.0036Fits in one request
GPT-5.2$0.0088Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.1$0.083Fits in one request
GPT-5.2$0.130Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.1$0.324Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.2$0.490Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 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 GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.2
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.1OpenAI GPT-5.2
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 7, 2026December 10, 2025
Context window205K400K
Input $/Mtok$1.40$1.75
Output $/Mtok$4.40$14.00
Coding index44.058.9
Independent measurements behind it12
Cost per solved task$0.60$1.91
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.1 better than GPT-5.2 for coding?

Pick GPT-5.2 for coding: it scores 58.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 44.0 for GLM 5.1. Pick GLM 5.1 when output tokens cost 3.2x less, or when a solved task costs $0.60 against $1.91.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or GPT-5.2?

GLM 5.1 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 costs $1.75 and $14.00. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GLM 5.1 costs $0.60 and GPT-5.2 $1.91.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.1 or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2, with 400K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.1 vs GPT-5.2 comparison based on?

73 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-5.2's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next