Claude Opus 4.5 vs GLM-5.2
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Facts
Wins 5 of 7 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
GLM-5.2 is the stronger all-rounder.Claude Opus 4.5 is better at facts.
Scores updated · 38 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software05GLM-5.25 of 6 tests · 1 tie
- MathCompetition and research-level math05GLM-5.25 of 6 tests · 1 tie
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking23GLM-5.23 of 5 tests
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01GLM-5.21 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01GLM-5.21 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21Claude Opus 4.52 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own11Even1 each
Long documents rests on a single test.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
GLM-5.2 costs 81% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where GLM-5.2 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+34.7points ahead
- Unpublished advanced math problemsFrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)+24.8points ahead
- Extremely hard research-level math problemsFrontierMath Tier 4+24.4points ahead
Where Claude Opus 4.5 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+22.3points ahead
- Abstract visual puzzles that people can solveARC-AGI-2+14.8points ahead
- Short factual questions, answered correctlySimpleQA Verified+11.5points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 38 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGLM-5.2
- LMArena · WebDevGLM-5.2 by 134 rating points14691603+134 rating
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingGLM-5.2 by 12.139.751.8+12.1
- SWE-bench ProGLM-5.2 by 10.15262.1+10.1
- Terminal-Bench HardGLM-5.2 by 3.84750.8+3.8
- SciCodeGLM-5.2 by 1.749.551.2+1.7
- LiveBench · Codingtie79.779.7tie
AgentsEven
ReasoningGLM-5.2
- CritPtGLM-5.2 by 16.34.620.9+16.3
- ARC-AGI-2Claude Opus 4.5 by 14.837.622.8+14.8
- Humanity's Last ExamGLM-5.2 by 1130.141.1+11
- GPQA DiamondGLM-5.2 by 2.986.689.5+2.9
- LiveBench · ReasoningClaude Opus 4.5 by 1.580.178.6+1.5
FactsClaude Opus 4.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGLM-5.2 by 34.73973.7+34.7
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.5 by 22.346.624.3+22.3
- SimpleQA VerifiedClaude Opus 4.5 by 11.545.734.2+11.5
MathGLM-5.2
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)GLM-5.2 by 24.834.459.2+24.8
- FrontierMath Tier 4GLM-5.2 by 24.44.929.3+24.4
- HMMT Feb. 2026GLM-5.2 by 7.285.392.5+7.2
- IMOAnswerBenchGLM-5.2 by 78491+7
- AIME 2026GLM-5.2 by 4.195.199.2+4.1
- LiveBench · Mathematicstie90.489.8tie
Following instructionsGLM-5.2
- IFBenchGLM-5.2 by 15.35873.3+15.3
- LiveBench · Instruction Followingtie62.562.3tie
Other results13 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- CyberGymGLM-5.2 by 26.650.677.2+26.6
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGLM-5.2 by 2147.868.8+21
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Opus 4.5 by 20.259.639.4+20.2
- HLE (with tools)GLM-5.2 by 11.543.254.7+11.5
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Opus 4.5 by 9.6144.4+9.6
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)GLM-5.2 by 9.689.599.1+9.6
- NL2RepoGLM-5.2 by 5.743.248.9+5.7
- livebench_languageClaude Opus 4.5 by 5.181.376.2+5.1
- ARC-AGI-1Claude Opus 4.5 by 58277+5
- ToolathlonGLM-5.2 by 4.743.548.2+4.7
- AA IntelligenceGLM-5.2 by 4.629.133.7+4.6
- HMMT Nov. 2025GLM-5.2 by 1.193.394.4+1.1
- livebench_data_analysistie74.473.7tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or GLM-5.2?
GLM-5.2 wins five of the seven areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, math, long documents and following instructions. Claude Opus 4.5 wins facts. They are level on agents.
Which is better for coding?
GLM-5.2. It wins 5 of the 6 coding tests both models report; Claude Opus 4.5 wins none, and 1 is a tie.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4.5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; GLM-5.2 costs $1.40 and $4.40. That makes GLM-5.2 about 81% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 38 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 25 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 13 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.