Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Medium 3

GLM 5.2 leads Mistral Medium 3 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 33.7 to 9.0, and Mistral Medium 3 costs 2.2x less per output token ($2.00 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 43 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5.2Z.ai
Coding
61.1
Overall
33.7
Output $/M
$4.40
43
Mistral Medium 3Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
9.0
Output $/M
$2.00
0
vs boards won of 43 shared

GLM 5.2 or Mistral Medium 3: which to pick

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Medium 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Mistral Medium 3 for output tokens 2.2x cheaper ($2.00 vs $4.40 per million).

Shared results
43
GLM 5.2 only
54
Mistral Medium 3 only
14
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
GLM 5.2 61.1 from 4 benchmarks, Mistral Medium 3 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 74.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GLM 5.2 99.1% against Mistral Medium 3 24.3%, 74.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.2 $4.40 against Mistral Medium 3 $2.00 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.2 takes 1.05M tokens, Mistral Medium 3 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 Medium 3Ties
Coding30
Intelligence20
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Math20
Knowledge40
Web design60
General200
All shared boards430
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
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 measured40.0%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
SciCode51.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)50.8%3.8%GLM 5.2
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: coding14871385GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: software and IT14861385GLM 5.2
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 index20
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
AA Intelligence Index33.79.0GLM 5.2
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9134.0GLM 5.2
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
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 apps1178Not 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%24.3%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 index50
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
GPQA Diamond85.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.5%57.8%GLM 5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)41.1%4.1%GLM 5.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)91.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
ARC-AGI77.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
ARC-AGI-222.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
SimpleBench58.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
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 prompts14811364GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: expert14871342GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14811374GLM 5.2
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1155Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1165Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured30.3Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured30.3%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
OTIS Mock AIME86.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
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
LMArena Text: math14831353GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: mathematical work14891354GLM 5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
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 measured76.0%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
SimpleQA Verified34.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: science14891381GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14751381GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: legal and government14861384GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: business and finance14511352GLM 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 index60
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
Design Arena: websites12851079GLM 5.2
Design Arena: UI components12961024GLM 5.2
Design Arena: game dev12681018GLM 5.2
Design Arena: data viz12851034GLM 5.2
Design Arena: 3D12881084GLM 5.2
Design Arena: all code categories12881069GLM 5.2
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 index200
General benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
IFBench73.3%39.3%GLM 5.2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.3%31.3%GLM 5.2
DTBench93.6%62.3%GLM 5.2
LMCA45.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Surface Evolver Bench55.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text14701370GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: instruction following14661338GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: creative writing14631343GLM 5.2
LMArena VisionNot measured1157Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: English14751385GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: non-English14591353GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Chinese15221374GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: German14701377GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Japanese14501316GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Korean14401304GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: French14791368GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Spanish14781364GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Russian14681359GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Polish14561371GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: multi-turn14691384GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: longer queries14801360GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: writing and language14631352GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14501335GLM 5.2
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1172Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1161Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1154Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1145Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1094Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1141Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1146Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 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 Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3Leader
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 Medium 3$0.0014Fits in one request

Mistral Medium 3 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.2$0.083Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3$0.026Fits in one request

Mistral Medium 3 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.2$0.324Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3$0.100Exceeds the context window

Mistral Medium 3 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 Medium 3
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3
MakerZ.aiMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJune 16, 2026May 7, 2025
Context window1.05M131K
Input $/Mtok$1.40$0.40
Output $/Mtok$4.40$2.00
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 Medium 3 for coding?

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Medium 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mistral Medium 3 for output tokens 2.2x cheaper ($2.00 vs $4.40 per million).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.2 or Mistral Medium 3?

GLM 5.2 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3 costs $0.40 and $2.00. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.2 or Mistral Medium 3?

GLM 5.2, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Medium 3 comparison based on?

43 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 Medium 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next