DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp vs GLM-5.2
Wins 3 of 4 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Following instructions
Wins 1 of 4 areas
Math
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp is the stronger all-rounder.GLM-5.2 is better at math.
Scores updated · 15 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the four 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 software21DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp2 of 3 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking10DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp1 of 1 test
- MathCompetition and research-level math01GLM-5.21 of 1 test
Reasoning, math and following instructions rest on a single test each.
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.
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp costs 85% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp pulls ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues, working as an agentLiveBench · Agentic Coding+13.3points ahead
- Follows detailed instructions exactlyLiveBench · Instruction Following+8.7points ahead
- Fresh logic puzzles that change regularlyLiveBench · Reasoning+6.8points ahead
Where GLM-5.2 pulls ahead
- Programming problems, refreshed regularlyLiveBench · Coding+11.5points ahead
- Fresh competition math problemsLiveBench · Mathematics+2points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 15 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 13.365.151.8+13.3
- LiveBench · CodingGLM-5.2 by 11.568.279.7+11.5
- Terminal-Bench 2.1DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 683.977.9+6
ReasoningDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp
- LiveBench · ReasoningDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 6.885.478.6+6.8
Following instructionsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 8.77162.3+8.7
Other results9 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.
- Toolathlon VerifiedDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 1675.959.9+16
- DeepSWEDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 13.159.346.2+13.1
- AutomationBench PublicDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 12.825.712.9+12.8
- DSBench-HardDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 9.163.654.5+9.1
- NL2RepoDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 8.857.748.9+8.8
- livebench_data_analysisDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 5.879.573.7+5.8
- livebench_languageDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 4.280.476.2+4.2
- Agents' Last ExamDeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp by 3.527.323.8+3.5
- CyberGymGLM-5.2 by 1.975.377.2+1.9
Questions people ask
Which is better, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp or GLM-5.2?
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp wins three of the four areas where both have results: coding, reasoning and following instructions. GLM-5.2 wins math.
Which is better for coding?
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp. It wins 2 of the 3 coding tests both models report; GLM-5.2 wins 1.
Which is cheaper?
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp costs $0.22 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; GLM-5.2 costs $1.40 and $4.40. That makes DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp about 85% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 15 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 6 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 9 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.