Noometry

Model comparison

Command R vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 8.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Command R Cohere

31.0

Rank #267 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

50.9

Rank #38 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.2 leads 70.7 to 38.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 46.4% for Command R and 93.6% for GLM-5.2.
  • Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.2.
  • GLM-5.2 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Command RGLM-5.2
ProviderCohereZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index31.050.9
Released2024-08-302026-06-13
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K1M
Max output4K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$1.40
Output $ / M tokens$0.60$4.40
Results tracked2950

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Command R: 28.8 (#301), GLM-5.2: 50.9 (#37)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
LMArena Coding11701484
SWE-bench Verified—78.7%
DeepSWE—43.8%
FrontierCode—24.5%
LMArena WebDev—1604
SciCode—50.5%
WeirdML—70.1%
BigCodeBench Instruct37.1%—
LiveBench Coding17.9%—
BigCodeBench Complete45.2%—
ALE-Bench—1,047

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Command R: —, GLM-5.2: 31.6 (#63)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
τ²-bench Banking—37.1%
PostTrainBench—31.7%
GBAEval—0%
Vending-Bench 2—8,314

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

Command R: 13.3 (#329), GLM-5.2: 42.1 (#46)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
LMArena Hard Prompts11641480
DTBench46.4%93.6%
LMCA9.2%45.8%
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%
LiveBench Reasoning21.9%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
LiveBench Data Analysis33.3%—
Surface Evolver Bench—55.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—151.76
LiveBench27.5%—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

Command R: 25.8 (#244), GLM-5.2: 55.4 (#35)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
LMArena Math11551482
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—59.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4—29.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—67.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.4%
ProofBench—35%
LiveBench Math19.4%—

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

Command R: 30.5 (#219), GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#36)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
LMArena Expert11381484
GPQA Diamond—91.9%
SimpleQA Verified—34.2%
MMLU65.2%—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

Command R: 35.9 (#240), GLM-5.2: 56.0 (#25)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English11741459
LMArena Chinese11821518
LMArena French11611476
LMArena German11761470
LMArena Japanese11431451
LMArena Korean11621445
LMArena Russian11741467
LMArena Spanish11501477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Command R: 58.3 (#256), GLM-5.2: 77.1 (#32)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following11671465
LiveBench Instruction Following55.6%—

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

Command R: 36.3 (#226), GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query11981479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Command R: 38.4 (#248), GLM-5.2: 70.7 (#20)

BenchmarkCommand RGLM-5.2
LMArena Text11871470
LMArena Creative Writing11701465
LMArena Multi-Turn11631468
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1757
EQ-Bench 4—1222
LiveBench Language16.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R better than GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 8.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Command R or GLM-5.2?

Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GLM-5.2 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

Is Command R or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.9 versus 28.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.2 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R and GLM-5.2 share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 50.

Related comparisons

Go deeper