Model comparison
GLM-5.2 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra
GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 44.7 on the Noometry Index. Nemotron 3 Ultra costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.
NVIDIASummary
- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.2 scores higher in 8 categories and Nemotron 3 Ultra in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.2 leads 55.4 to 34.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 35% for GLM-5.2 and 2% for Nemotron 3 Ultra.
- Nemotron 3 Ultra is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.2.
- GLM-5.2 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
Side by side
| GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | NVIDIA |
| Noometry Index | 50.9 | 44.7 |
| Released | 2026-06-13 | 2026-06-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 50 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 50.9 (#37), Nemotron 3 Ultra: 37.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 24.5% | 13.6% |
| SciCode | 50.5% | 40.3% |
| WeirdML | 70.1% | 43.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1484 | 1468 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 78.7% | — |
| DeepSWE | 43.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1604 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,047 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5.2: 31.6 (#63), Nemotron 3 Ultra: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench Banking | 37.1% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 31.7% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8,314 | — |
Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 42.1 (#46), Nemotron 3 Ultra: 30.3 (#78)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 20.9% | 3.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 21% | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1480 | 1452 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | 20% |
| DTBench | 93.6% | 90.1% |
| LMCA | 45.8% | 36.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.76 | 146.2 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 22.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 62.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 74.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 77% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 9.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 55.6% | — |
Math GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 55.4 (#35), Nemotron 3 Ultra: 34.4 (#160)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.4% | 86.7% |
| ProofBench | 35% | 2% |
| LMArena Math | 1482 | 1456 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 59.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.6% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#36), Nemotron 3 Ultra: 52.5 (#56)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.9% | 85.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1484 | 1472 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.2% | — |
Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 56.0 (#25), Nemotron 3 Ultra: 53.7 (#61)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1459 | 1427 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1518 | 1498 |
| LMArena French | 1476 | 1475 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1471 |
| LMArena Korean | 1445 | 1387 |
| LMArena Russian | 1467 | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1477 | 1452 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1451 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 77.1 (#32), Nemotron 3 Ultra: 74.9 (#84)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1465 | 1417 |
Long Context GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Nemotron 3 Ultra: 43.9 (#77)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | 1437 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 70.7 (#20), Nemotron 3 Ultra: 66.3 (#35)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Nemotron 3 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1470 | 1444 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | 1392 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1757 | 1692 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1468 | 1412 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1222 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.2 better than Nemotron 3 Ultra?
GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 44.7 on the Noometry Index. Nemotron 3 Ultra costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.2 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?
Nemotron 3 Ultra is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; GLM-5.2 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.
Is GLM-5.2 or Nemotron 3 Ultra better for coding?
GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.9 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-5.2 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Nemotron 3 Ultra share?
29 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 50 scored results on Noometry and Nemotron 3 Ultra has 29.