# GLM-5.2 vs Granite 4.2 8B

> GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 40.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.2 8B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-5-2-vs-granite-4-2-8b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.2 scores higher in 7 categories and Granite 4.2 8B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.2 leads 70.7 to 49.8.
- Granite 4.2 8B is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.2.
- GLM-5.2 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | IBM |
| Noometry Index | 50.9 | 40.0 |
| Rank | 38 | 143 |
| Context | 1M | 131K |
| Input $/M | $1.40 | $0.06 |
| Output $/M | $4.40 | $0.25 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-5.2: 50.9 (#37)
- Granite 4.2 8B: 39.9 (#138)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1484 | 1379 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 78.7% | — |
| DeepSWE | 43.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 24.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1604 | — |
| SciCode | 50.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 70.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,047 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-5.2: 31.6 (#63)
- Granite 4.2 8B: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench Banking | 37.1% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 31.7% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8,314 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-5.2: 42.1 (#46)
- Granite 4.2 8B: 25.5 (#130)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1480 | 1327 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 22.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 62.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 74.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 77% | — |
| CritPt | 20.9% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 21% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 9.5% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | — |
| DTBench | 93.6% | — |
| LMCA | 45.8% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 55.6% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.76 | — |

## Math

- GLM-5.2: 55.4 (#35)
- Granite 4.2 8B: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 59.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.4% | — |
| ProofBench | 35% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1482 | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#36)
- Granite 4.2 8B: 37.7 (#144)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1484 | 1380 |
| GPQA Diamond | 91.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-5.2: 56.0 (#25)
- Granite 4.2 8B: 44.5 (#173)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1459 | 1299 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1518 | 1361 |
| LMArena Russian | 1467 | 1283 |
| LMArena French | 1476 | — |
| LMArena German | 1470 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1451 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1445 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1477 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-5.2: 77.1 (#32)
- Granite 4.2 8B: 68.7 (#183)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1465 | 1298 |

## Long Context

- GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)
- Granite 4.2 8B: 40.2 (#154)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | 1323 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-5.2: 70.7 (#20)
- Granite 4.2 8B: 49.8 (#183)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1470 | 1319 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | 1238 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1468 | 1299 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1757 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1222 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-5.2 better than Granite 4.2 8B?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 40.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.2 8B costs 20× 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 Granite 4.2 8B?

Granite 4.2 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.25 per million output tokens; GLM-5.2 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

### Is GLM-5.2 or Granite 4.2 8B better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.9 versus 39.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.2 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Granite 4.2 8B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 50 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.2 8B has 11.