# GLM-4.6 vs GPT-5.2 Pro

> GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6 costs 58× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-6-vs-gpt-5-2-pro
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-4.6 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 51.8 to 23.1.
- GLM-4.6 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-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 52.2 |
| Rank | 132 | 34 |
| Context | 205K | 400K |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | $21 |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | $168 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6: 39.9 (#137)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 55.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1339 | — |
| SciCode | 38.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1449 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 340.82 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.6: 32.1 (#60)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 24.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 72.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6: 23.1 (#168)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.8 (#31)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 54.2% |
| SimpleBench | — | 57.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 47.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 79.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 90.5% |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1440 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 155.41 |

## Math

- GLM-4.6: 36.4 (#115)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: 64.8 (#23)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | 31.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46% |
| LMArena Math | 1431 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 3.8% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6: 39.6 (#118)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1432 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6: 53.6 (#62)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1426 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1500 | — |
| LMArena French | 1459 | — |
| LMArena German | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1394 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1436 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6: 74.5 (#93)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1410 | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#91)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1423 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6: 61.3 (#86)
- GPT-5.2 Pro: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1440 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1427 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6 better than GPT-5.2 Pro?

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6 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-4.6 or GPT-5.2 Pro?

GLM-4.6 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-4.6 and GPT-5.2 Pro share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Pro has 8.