Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs GPT-5.2 Pro
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 128× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 51.5 to 27.6.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $21 / $168 for GPT-5.2 Pro.
- GPT-5.2 Pro accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 128K.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 52.3 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2025-12-11 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 400K |
| Max output | 33K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $21 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | $168 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 8 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128), GPT-5.2 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115), GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.5 (#33)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 54.2% |
| SimpleBench | — | 57.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 79.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 90.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 155.4 |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, GPT-5.2 Pro: 65.3 (#29)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 31.3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149), GPT-5.2 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90), GPT-5.2 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141), GPT-5.2 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151), GPT-5.2 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143), GPT-5.2 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137), GPT-5.2 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than GPT-5.2 Pro?
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 128× 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-4.6V or GPT-5.2 Pro?
GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 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 128K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and GPT-5.2 Pro share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Pro has 8.