Noometry

Model comparison

Claude 3 Sonnet vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Claude 3 Sonnet Anthropic

29.0

Rank #319 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3 Sonnet scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.2 leads 55.7 to 10.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 2.5% for Claude 3 Sonnet and 86.4% for GLM-5.2.
  • GLM-5.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
ProviderAnthropicZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index29.051.1
Released2024-02-292026-06-13
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked3051

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 29.6 (#302), GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
WeirdML10.2%70.1%
LMArena Coding12231485
SWE-bench Verified—78.7%
DeepSWE—43.8%
FrontierCode—24.5%
LMArena WebDev—1603
SciCode—50.5%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.7%—
BigCodeBench Complete53.8%—
ALE-Bench—1,047
HumanEval+64%—
MBPP+69.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude 3 Sonnet: —, GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
APEX-Agents—45.2%
τ²-bench Banking—37.1%
PostTrainBench—31.7%
GBAEval—0%
Vending-Bench 2—8,314

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 20.5 (#237), GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
LMArena Hard Prompts11971480
DTBench53.6%93.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index120.7151.78
ARC-AGI-2—22.8%
SimpleBench—58.8%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—62.6%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.3%
ARC-AGI-1—77%
CritPt—20.9%
Chess Puzzles—21%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
LMCA—45.8%
Surface Evolver Bench—55.6%
WinoGrande75.1%—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 10.7 (#310), GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20252.5%86.4%
LMArena Math12131482
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—59.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4—29.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—67.6%
ProofBench—35%
MATH Level 518.2%—

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 21.1 (#276), GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
GPQA Diamond40.6%91.9%
LMArena Expert11731486
SimpleQA Verified—34.2%
MMLU75.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude 3 Sonnet: 25.2 (#125), GLM-5.2: —

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
LMArena Vision984—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 37.8 (#234), GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English12051459
LMArena Chinese11891519
LMArena French12291479
LMArena German12041468
LMArena Japanese11311451
LMArena Korean11281445
LMArena Russian12271466
LMArena Spanish12041477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 62.8 (#235), GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following11991465

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 36.7 (#228), GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query12111479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Claude 3 Sonnet: 42.1 (#238), GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21)

BenchmarkClaude 3 SonnetGLM-5.2
LMArena Text12181470
LMArena Creative Writing11861462
LMArena Multi-Turn12271469
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1757
EQ-Bench 4—1222

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 3 Sonnet better than GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 3 Sonnet or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 3 Sonnet and GLM-5.2 share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3 Sonnet has 30 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 51.

Related comparisons

Go deeper