Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.2 vs Perceptron Mk1

Perceptron Mk1 costs 2.9x less per output token than GLM 5.2 ($1.50 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

GLM 5.2Z.ai
Coding
61.1
Overall
62.5
Output $/M
$4.40
Perceptron Mk1Perceptron
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
vs $4.40 vs $1.50 per 1M output tokens. Perceptron Mk1 is 2.9x cheaper.

GLM 5.2 or Perceptron Mk1: which to pick

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Perceptron Mk1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Perceptron Mk1 for output tokens 2.9x cheaper ($1.50 vs $4.40 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. GLM 5.2 has results on LMArena WebDev, AA Coding Index and LiveCodeBench (Vals AI); Perceptron Mk1 has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead.

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, Perceptron Mk1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
GLM 5.2 $4.40 against Perceptron Mk1 $1.50 per million output tokens, 2.9x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.2 takes 1.05M tokens, Perceptron Mk1 33K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index18 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1Leader
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
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 21 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1Leader
AA Intelligence Index33.7Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1Leader
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%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
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 24 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1Leader
GPQA Diamond85.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)41.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
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 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
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1Leader
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: math1483Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1489Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1Leader
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
SimpleQA Verified34.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 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 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1Leader
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
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23 boards measured
General benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
IFBench73.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
DTBench93.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMCA45.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 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 23 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
Perceptron Mk1$0.0009Fits in one request

Perceptron Mk1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.2$0.083Fits in one request
Perceptron Mk1$0.012Exceeds the context window

Perceptron Mk1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.2$0.324Fits in one request
Perceptron Mk1$0.045Exceeds the context window

Perceptron Mk1 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 Perceptron Mk1
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.2Perceptron Mk1
MakerZ.aiPerceptron
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJune 16, 2026May 12, 2026
Context window1.05M33K
Input $/Mtok$1.40$0.15
Output $/Mtok$4.40$1.50
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 Perceptron Mk1 for coding?

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Perceptron Mk1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Perceptron Mk1 for output tokens 2.9x cheaper ($1.50 vs $4.40 per million).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.2 or Perceptron Mk1?

GLM 5.2 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Perceptron Mk1 costs $0.15 and $1.50. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.2 or Perceptron Mk1?

GLM 5.2, with 1.05M tokens against 33K.

Has any benchmark tested both GLM 5.2 and Perceptron Mk1?

No benchmark has tested both yet. GLM 5.2 has results on LMArena WebDev, AA Coding Index and LiveCodeBench (Vals AI); Perceptron Mk1 has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next