Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs GPT-5.2 Pro

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7 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 . 3 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI

52.3

Rank #39 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 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 24.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 47.7% for GLM-4.7 and 57.4% for GPT-5.2 Pro.
  • GLM-4.7 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-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index42.052.3
Released2025-12-222025-12-11
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K400K
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$21
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$168
Results tracked368

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena WebDev1435—
SciCode45.1%—
LMArena Coding1454—
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.5 (#33)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
SimpleBench47.7%57.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51155.4
ARC-AGI-2—54.2%
NYT Connections (extended)—79.3%
ARC-AGI-1—90.5%
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1443—

Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), GPT-5.2 Pro: 65.3 (#29)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%31.3%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.3%—
ProofBench6%—
LMArena Math1423—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.4%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—
LMArena Expert1424—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Non-English1417—
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1424—
LMArena Japanese1439—
LMArena Korean1399—
LMArena Russian1423—
LMArena Spanish1434—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Instruction Following1411—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1432—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Text1435—
LMArena Creative Writing1401—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—
LMArena Multi-Turn1446—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than GPT-5.2 Pro?

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.3 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7 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-4.7 or GPT-5.2 Pro?

GLM-4.7 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-4.7 and GPT-5.2 Pro share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Pro has 8.

Related comparisons

Go deeper