Model comparison

GLM-5.2 vs Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 Tencent

38.6

Rank #184 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.2 scores higher in 8 categories and Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.2 leads 57.1 to 35.1.
  • GLM-5.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.2 and Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 specifications
GLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Tencent
Noometry Index51.138.6
Released2026-06-13—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked5112

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), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 38.2 (#181)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Coding14851307
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
DeepSWE43.8%—
FrontierCode24.5%—
LMArena WebDev1603—
SciCode50.5%—
WeirdML70.1%—
ALE-Bench1,047—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
APEX-Agents45.2%—
τ²-bench Banking37.1%—
PostTrainBench31.7%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 28,314—

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 25.5 (#148)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Hard Prompts14801286
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), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 35.8 (#178)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Math14821281
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), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 35.1 (#188)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Expert14861276
GPQA Diamond91.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34.2%—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 42.0 (#200)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Non-English14591265
LMArena Chinese15191346
LMArena Russian14661266
LMArena French1479—
LMArena German1468—
LMArena Japanese1451—
LMArena Korean1445—
LMArena Spanish1477—

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 67.3 (#197)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Instruction Following14651277

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 40.8 (#149)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Longer Query14791341

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 48.7 (#197)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Text14701288
LMArena Creative Writing14621264
LMArena Multi-Turn14691284
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1757—
EQ-Bench 41222—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.2 or Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 38.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper