Model comparison

GLM-5.2 vs Grok 4.1

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Grok 4.1 xAI

41.5

Rank #134 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.2 scores higher in 8 categories and Grok 4.1 in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.2 leads 57.1 to 39.5.
  • GLM-5.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.2 and Grok 4.1 specifications
GLM-5.2Grok 4.1
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)xAI
Noometry Index51.141.5
Released2026-06-132025-11-17
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked5119

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41), Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
LMArena WebDev16031214
LMArena Coding14851445
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
DeepSWE43.8%—
FrontierCode24.5%—
SciCode50.5%—
WeirdML70.1%—
ALE-Bench1,047—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 leads

GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63), Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
APEX-Agents45.2%—
τ²-bench Banking37.1%—
Cybench—39%
PostTrainBench31.7%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 28,314—

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52), Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
LMArena Hard Prompts14801435
ARC-AGI-222.8%—
SimpleBench58.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)74.3%—
ARC-AGI-177%—
CritPt20.9%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
EBR-Bench9.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles19%—
DTBench93.6%—
LMCA45.8%—
Surface Evolver Bench55.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.78—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43), Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
LMArena Math14821422
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.4%—
ProofBench35%—

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40), Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
LMArena Expert14861417
GPQA Diamond91.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34.2%—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26), Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
LMArena Non-English14591425
LMArena Chinese15191465
LMArena French14791448
LMArena German14681446
LMArena Japanese14511397
LMArena Korean14451407
LMArena Russian14661434
LMArena Spanish14771438

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34), Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
LMArena Instruction Following14651400

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
LMArena Longer Query14791416

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21), Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Grok 4.1
LMArena Text14701437
LMArena Creative Writing14621411
LMArena Multi-Turn14691437
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1757—
EQ-Bench 41222—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than Grok 4.1?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.2 or Grok 4.1 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Grok 4.1 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.1 has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper