Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs GPT-5.2 Pro

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6 costs 58× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI

52.3

Rank #39 Reported

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.2 Pro in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 51.5 to 23.7.
  • GLM-4.6 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $21 / $168 for GPT-5.2 Pro.
  • GPT-5.2 Pro accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index41.452.3
Released2025-09-302025-12-11
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K400K
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$21
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$168
Results tracked298

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)55.4%—
LMArena WebDev1340—
SciCode38.4%—
LMArena Coding1449—
ALE-Bench340.82—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
Terminal-Bench24.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.4%—

Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads

GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.5 (#33)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
ARC-AGI-2—54.2%
SimpleBench—57.4%
Kagi LLM Benchmark47.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)—79.3%
ARC-AGI-1—90.5%
CritPt1.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1440—
Epoch Capabilities Index—155.4

Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads

GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), GPT-5.2 Pro: 65.3 (#29)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%31.3%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46%
LMArena Math1432—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)3.8%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.5%—
LMArena Expert1431—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Non-English1426—
LMArena Chinese1499—
LMArena French1459—
LMArena German1447—
LMArena Japanese1393—
LMArena Korean1400—
LMArena Russian1419—
LMArena Spanish1436—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Instruction Following1410—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Longer Query1422—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Text1440—
LMArena Creative Writing1411—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1411—
LMArena Multi-Turn1427—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6 better than GPT-5.2 Pro?

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6 costs 58× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or GPT-5.2 Pro?

GLM-4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Pro lists at $21 and $168.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.2 Pro does, with 400K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and GPT-5.2 Pro share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Pro has 8.

Related comparisons

Go deeper