Model comparison

Seed 2.0 Pro vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index. Seed 2.0 Pro costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 18 shared benchmarks.

Seed 2.0 Pro

ByteDance Seed

42.5

Rank #97 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

50.9

Rank #38 Confirmed

Summary

They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.2 leads 42.1 to 23.1.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 28.4% for Seed 2.0 Pro and 74.3% for GLM-5.2.
Seed 2.0 Pro is cheaper at $0.50 / $3 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.2.
GLM-5.2 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 256K.
GLM-5.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Seed 2.0 Pro and GLM-5.2 specifications
	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
Provider	ByteDance Seed	Z.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index	42.5	50.9
Released	2026-02-14	2026-06-13
Weights	Proprietary	Open
Context window	256K	1M
Max output	128K	131K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.50	$1.40
Output $ / M tokens	$3	$4.40
Results tracked	20	50

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 42.9 (#84), GLM-5.2: 50.9 (#37)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
LMArena Coding	1472	1484
SWE-bench Verified	—	78.7%
DeepSWE	—	43.8%
FrontierCode	—	24.5%
LMArena WebDev	—	1604
SciCode	—	50.5%
WeirdML	—	70.1%
ALE-Bench	—	1,047

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-5.2: 31.6 (#63)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
τ²-bench Banking	—	37.1%
PostTrainBench	—	31.7%
GBAEval	—	0%
Vending-Bench 2	—	8,314

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 23.1 (#167), GLM-5.2: 42.1 (#46)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
NYT Connections (extended)	28.4%	74.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1453	1480
ARC-AGI-2	—	22.8%
SimpleBench	—	58.8%
Kagi LLM Benchmark	—	62.6%
ARC-AGI-1	—	77%
CritPt	—	20.9%
Chess Puzzles	—	21%
Thematic Generalization	57.1%	—
EBR-Bench	—	9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	19%
DTBench	—	93.6%
LMCA	—	45.8%
Surface Evolver Bench	—	55.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	151.76

Math GLM-5.2 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#110), GLM-5.2: 55.4 (#35)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
LMArena Math	1440	1482
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%

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.6 (#119), GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#36)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
LMArena Expert	1440	1484
GPQA Diamond	—	91.9%
SimpleQA Verified	—	34.2%

Multimodal Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.8 (#34), GLM-5.2: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
LMArena Vision	1275	—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.8 (#37), GLM-5.2: 56.0 (#25)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English	1442	1459
LMArena Chinese	1490	1518
LMArena French	1470	1476
LMArena German	1443	1470
LMArena Japanese	1408	1451
LMArena Korean	1412	1445
LMArena Russian	1450	1467
LMArena Spanish	1460	1477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.7 (#86), GLM-5.2: 77.1 (#32)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following	1414	1465

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#85), GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query	1428	1479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 63.0 (#66), GLM-5.2: 70.7 (#20)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Seed 2.0 Pro	GLM-5.2
LMArena Text	1448	1470
LMArena Creative Writing	1406	1465
LMArena Multi-Turn	1441	1468
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	1757
EQ-Bench 4	—	1222

Frequently asked questions

Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than GLM-5.2?

Which is cheaper, Seed 2.0 Pro or GLM-5.2?

Seed 2.0 Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens; GLM-5.2 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

Is Seed 2.0 Pro or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.9 versus 42.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.2 does, with 1M tokens against 256K.

How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and GLM-5.2 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 50.