Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.2 vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

GLM 5.2 leads Qwen3.5-35B-A3B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 33.7 to 19.3, and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B costs 3.4x less per output token ($1.30 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 46 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5.2Z.ai
Coding
61.1
Overall
62.5
Output $/M
$4.40
46
Qwen3.5-35B-A3BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
53.5
Output $/M
$1.30
0
vs boards won of 46 shared

GLM 5.2 or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B: which to pick

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for output tokens 3.4x cheaper ($1.30 vs $4.40 per million).

Shared results
46
GLM 5.2 only
58
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only
0
Like-for-like categories
7 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, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 33.0 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: React: GLM 5.2 1617 against Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 1238, 60.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.2 $4.40 against Qwen3.5-35B-A3B $1.30 per million output tokens, 3.4x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.2 takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 262K.

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 5.2BarsQwen3.5-35B-A3BTies
Coding70
Intelligence20
Agentic work20
Reasoning60
Math40
Knowledge40
General210
All shared boards460
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index70
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
LMArena WebDev16041254GLM 5.2
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%26.5%GLM 5.2
FrontierCode24.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
WeirdML70.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
ALE-Bench1047.0221.8GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: coding14871410GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: software and IT14861415GLM 5.2
LMArena WebDev: React16171238GLM 5.2
LMArena WebDev: HTML15651301GLM 5.2
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA48.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
SWE Atlas: Refactoring42.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
SWE Atlas: Test Writing41.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
AA Intelligence Index33.719.3GLM 5.2
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9142.5GLM 5.2
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
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 apps1159Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1177Not 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 slides1114Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1167Not 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%89.2%GLM 5.2
APEX-Agents45.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
PostTrainBench31.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Vending-Bench 2$8,314$463GLM 5.2
MCP Atlas77.8%Not measuredOnly 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 index60
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
GPQA Diamond85.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.5%84.5%GLM 5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)41.1%21.0%GLM 5.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)91.9%83.5%GLM 5.2
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 prompts14811400GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: expert14871408GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14811411GLM 5.2
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME86.4%70.0%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
LMArena Text: math14831404GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: mathematical work14891410GLM 5.2
MathArena22.7%14.7%GLM 5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
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: science14891413GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14751421GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: legal and government14861399GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: business and finance14511394GLM 5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 10 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 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
Design Arena: websites1285Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: UI components1294Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: game dev1267Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: data viz1286Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: 3D1287Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1287Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: SVG1213Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1191Not 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 index210
General benchmarks for GLM 5.2 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
IFBench73.3%72.5%GLM 5.2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.3%72.0%GLM 5.2
DTBench93.6%80.0%GLM 5.2
LMCA45.8%29.5%GLM 5.2
Surface Evolver Bench55.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
LMArena Text14701395GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: instruction following14661379GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: creative writing14631347GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: English14751407GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: non-English14591378GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Chinese15221457GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: German14701367GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Japanese14501326GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Korean14401355GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: French14791412GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Spanish14781390GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Russian14681376GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: Polish14561385GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: multi-turn14691390GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: longer queries14801389GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: writing and language14631365GLM 5.2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14501347GLM 5.2
EQ-Bench 41222Not measuredOnly GLM 5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 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 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkGLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
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
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B$0.0008Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.2$0.083Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B$0.012Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.2$0.324Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B$0.045Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 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 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.2Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJune 16, 2026February 25, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$1.40$0.1625
Output $/Mtok$4.40$1.30
Coding index61.1Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it41
Cost per solved task$0.86Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.2 better than Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for coding?

Only GLM 5.2 has a coding score, 61.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for output tokens 3.4x cheaper ($1.30 vs $4.40 per million).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.2 or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

GLM 5.2 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B costs $0.1625 and $1.30. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.2 or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

GLM 5.2, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.2 vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B comparison based on?

46 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 5.2's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next