Skip to content
VECTOR WIREAI INTELLIGENCE
⌘K
UTC
Models741Deals30d271Policy30d66, 14 pendingSources1,015

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GLM-5.2

Anthropic · released

Wins 5 of 7 areas

Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Math

Z.ai · released

Wins 0 of 7 areas

—

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger all-rounder.GLM-5.2 is cheaper.

Scores updated · 66 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.

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.

Claude Opus 4.8$5.00 to read · $25.00 to write$30Price from Anthropic's own price page
GLM-5.2$1.40 to read · $4.40 to write$5.80Price from Z.ai's own price page

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 Claude Opus 4.8 pulls ahead

  • Abstract visual puzzles that people can solveARC-AGI-2+49.3points aheadClaude Opus 4.872.1GLM-5.222.8
  • Extremely hard research-level math problemsFrontierMath Tier 4+26.8points aheadClaude Opus 4.856.1GLM-5.229.3
  • Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+24.5points aheadClaude Opus 4.848.8GLM-5.224.3

Where GLM-5.2 pulls ahead

  • Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+13points aheadGLM-5.273.7Claude Opus 4.860.7
  • Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+11.1points aheadGLM-5.273.3Claude Opus 4.862.2
  • Olympiad math problems with short answersIMOAnswerBench+7.5points aheadGLM-5.291Claude Opus 4.883.5

Every test, side by side

All 66 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.

CodingClaude Opus 4.8

Full coding ranking

AgentsClaude Opus 4.8

Full agents ranking

ReasoningClaude Opus 4.8

Full reasoning ranking

FactsClaude Opus 4.8

Full facts ranking

MathClaude Opus 4.8

Full math ranking

Long documentsEven

Full long documents ranking

Following instructionsEven

Full following instructions ranking

Other results36 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.

Questions people ask

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or GLM-5.2?

Claude Opus 4.8 wins five of the seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts and math. GLM-5.2 wins none, but costs 81% less. They are level on long documents and following instructions.

Which is better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8. It wins 5 of the 7 coding tests both models report; GLM-5.2 wins 2.

Which is cheaper?

Claude Opus 4.8 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 66 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 30 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 36 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.

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 with

Anthropic

Across the field

Compare GLM-5.2 with

Z.ai

Across the field

All comparisons