Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5V Turbo vs GPT-5.2

GPT-5.2 leads GLM 5V Turbo on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 30.4 to 23.5, and GLM 5V Turbo costs 3.5x less per output token ($4.00 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 60 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5V TurboZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$4.00
45
GPT-5.2OpenAI
Coding
55.9
Overall
60.7
Output $/M
$14.00
14
vs boards won of 60 shared, 1 tied

GLM 5V Turbo or GPT-5.2: which to pick

Only GPT-5.2 has a coding score, 55.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 5V Turbo has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GLM 5V Turbo for output tokens 3.5x cheaper ($4.00 vs $14.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Shared results
60
GLM 5V Turbo only
5
GPT-5.2 only
54
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 5V Turbo not benchmarked, GPT-5.2 55.9 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 14.3 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: agents building Android apps: GLM 5V Turbo 1267 against GPT-5.2 1059, 26.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5V Turbo $4.00 against GPT-5.2 $14.00 per million output tokens, 3.5x apart.
Context window
GLM 5V Turbo takes 203K 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 5V TurboBarsGPT-5.2Ties
Coding23
Intelligence01
Agentic work51
Reasoning43
Math20
Knowledge40
Web design611 tie
General225
All shared boards45141 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index23
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-5.2Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured72.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured66.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena WebDev14021417GPT-5.2
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured85.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured75.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured53.5%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured89.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)32.6%47.0%GPT-5.2
Terminal-BenchNot measured64.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured27.5%Only GPT-5.2 measured
WeirdMLNot measured72.2%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1293.5Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: coding14661442GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: software and IT14601434GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena WebDev: React1386Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13561427GPT-5.2
LMArena WebDev: from an image1425Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-5.2Leader
AA Intelligence Index23.530.4GPT-5.2
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured153.7Only GPT-5.2 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index51
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-5.2Leader
Design Arena: agents building web apps11241086GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps11491043GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps11341093GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: agents building Android apps12671059GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: agents building Godot games9571142GPT-5.2
Design Arena: agents building games1102Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1070Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1127Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
τ²-Bench Telecom98.5%84.8%GLM 5V Turbo
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 2Not measured$3,591Only GPT-5.2 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured55.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index43
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-5.2Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured91.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured86.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)80.9%90.3%GPT-5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.1%37.7%GPT-5.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured91.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ARC-AGINot measured86.2%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured52.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured45.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured48.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
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 prompts14431428GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: expert14531445GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14561431GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: diagrams12861265GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: homework12731276GPT-5.2
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured73.3%Only 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 index20
Math benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-5.2Leader
AIMENot measured96.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
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 AIMENot measured96.1%Only GPT-5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured67.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured31.7%Only GPT-5.2 measured
ProofBenchNot measured15.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: math14421440GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: mathematical work14471442GLM 5V Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-5.2Leader
MMLU ProNot measured86.2%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured82.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured66.0%Only GPT-5.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured65.9%Only GPT-5.2 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured75.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
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)Not measured49.8%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured87.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured37.1%Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: science14481425GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14331425GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: legal and government14361427GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: business and finance14351414GLM 5V Turbo
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured48.5%Only GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-5.2Leader
Design Arena: websites12301195GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: UI components12101190GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: game dev12181195GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: data viz12021202Tie
Design Arena: 3D12081079GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: all code categories12281170GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: SVG11511139GLM 5V Turbo
Design Arena: ASCII art11171152GPT-5.2
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index225
General benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-5.2Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured49.3%Only GPT-5.2 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured84.4%Only GPT-5.2 measured
IFBench61.1%75.4%GPT-5.2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)70.3%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
LMArena Text14371416GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: instruction following14231409GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: creative writing14171376GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision12641246GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: English14541422GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: non-English14201405GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: Chinese14911447GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: German14221444GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1420Only GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: Korean13971374GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: French14431454GPT-5.2
LMArena Text: Spanish14521413GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: Russian14321415GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: Polish14321426GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: multi-turn14311419GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: longer queries14381413GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: writing and language14201392GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14071378GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: English12741243GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: Chinese13291305GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: reading text12701257GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: humor12681227GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: captioning12641267GPT-5.2
LMArena Vision: recognizing things12411232GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: creative writing12521225GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Document14161405GLM 5V Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboGPT-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 5V Turbo$0.0032Fits in one request
GPT-5.2$0.0088Fits in one request

GLM 5V Turbo costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5V Turbo$0.072Fits in one request
GPT-5.2$0.130Fits in one request

GLM 5V Turbo costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5V Turbo$0.280Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.2$0.490Fits in one request

GLM 5V Turbo 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 5V Turbo and GPT-5.2
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5V TurboOpenAI GPT-5.2
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 1, 2026December 10, 2025
Context window203K400K
Input $/Mtok$1.20$1.75
Output $/Mtok$4.00$14.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked55.9
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.91
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5V Turbo better than GPT-5.2 for coding?

Only GPT-5.2 has a coding score, 55.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 5V Turbo has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 5V Turbo for output tokens 3.5x cheaper ($4.00 vs $14.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5V Turbo or GPT-5.2?

GLM 5V Turbo costs $1.20 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 costs $1.75 and $14.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5V Turbo or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2, with 400K tokens against 203K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5V Turbo vs GPT-5.2 comparison based on?

60 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 5V Turbo's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-5.2's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next