Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Large 2407

Updated October 21, 2026. 10 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GLM 5.2Z.ai
Coding
61.1
Overall
33.7
Output $/M
$4.40
10
Mistral Large 2407Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
7.6
Output $/M
$6.00
0
vs boards won of 10 shared

Decision reading

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Large 2407 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
10
GLM 5.2 only
87
Mistral Large 2407 only
7
Like-for-like categories
5 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 5.2 61.1 from 4 benchmarks, Mistral Large 2407 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 77.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GLM 5.2 86.4% against Mistral Large 2407 8.5%, 77.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.2 $4.40 against Mistral Large 2407 $6.00 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.2 takes 1.05M tokens, Mistral Large 2407 131K.

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 5.2BarsMistral Large 2407Ties
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning40
Math10
General30
All shared boards100
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index19 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
LMArena WebDev1604Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
AA Coding Index68.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)69.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)82.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)64.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)37.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)67.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)45.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured26.7%Only Mistral Large 2407 measured
SciCode51.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)50.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
FrontierCode24.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
WeirdML70.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
ALE-Bench1047.0Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: coding1487Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1486Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1617Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1565Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
AA Intelligence Index33.77.6GLM 5.2
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
AA Agentic Index38.4Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1222Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1241Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1160Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1184Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1142Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1206Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1175Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1195Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)49.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)31.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)61.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom99.1%33.0%GLM 5.2
APEX-Agents45.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
PostTrainBench31.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Vending-Bench 2$8,314Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
GPQA Diamond85.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.5%47.2%GLM 5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)41.1%2.9%GLM 5.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)91.9%49.0%GLM 5.2
ARC-AGI77.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
ARC-AGI-222.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
SimpleBench58.8%22.5%GLM 5.2
Chess puzzles22.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Mystery game puzzles19.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
EBR-bench9.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1481Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: expert1487Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1481Not measuredOnly 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 index10
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured0.0Only Mistral Large 2407 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured0.0%Only Mistral Large 2407 measured
OTIS Mock AIME86.4%8.5%GLM 5.2
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 359.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tier 429.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
ProofBench35.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
MATH level 5Not measured44.8%Only Mistral Large 2407 measured
LMArena Text: math1483Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1489Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
MMLU Pro86.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)66.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)40.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured68.3%Only Mistral Large 2407 measured
SimpleQA Verified34.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
MMLUNot measured80.0%Only Mistral Large 2407 measured
LMArena Text: science1489Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1475Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1486Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1451Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
Design Arena: websites1285Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: UI components1296Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: game dev1268Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: data viz1285Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: 3D1288Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1288Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: SVG1214Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1190Not measuredOnly 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 index30
General benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
IFBench73.3%31.6%GLM 5.2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.3%2.0%GLM 5.2
DTBench93.6%61.2%GLM 5.2
LMCA45.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured69.0%Only Mistral Large 2407 measured
Surface Evolver Bench55.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text1470Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1466Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1463Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: English1475Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1459Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1522Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: German1470Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1450Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1440Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: French1479Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1478Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1468Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1456Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1469Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1480Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1463Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1450Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407Leader
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 5.2$0.0036Fits in one request
Mistral Large 2407$0.0050Fits in one request

GLM 5.2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.2$0.083Fits in one request
Mistral Large 2407$0.118Fits in one request

GLM 5.2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.2$0.324Fits in one request
Mistral Large 2407$0.460Exceeds the context window

GLM 5.2 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 5.2 and Mistral Large 2407
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.2Mistral Large 2407
MakerZ.aiMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJune 16, 2026November 19, 2024
Context window1.05M131K
Input $/Mtok$1.40$2.00
Output $/Mtok$4.40$6.00
Coding index61.1Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it40
Cost per solved task$0.86Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.2 better than Mistral Large 2407 for coding?

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Large 2407 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.2 or Mistral Large 2407?

GLM 5.2 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Mistral Large 2407 costs $2.00 and $6.00. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.2 or Mistral Large 2407?

GLM 5.2, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Large 2407 comparison based on?

10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5.2's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Mistral Large 2407's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next