Which is better, DeepSeek-V4-Flash or GLM-5.2 Full Open Source?

Across 52 shared benchmarks tracked on Vector Wire, DeepSeek-V4-Flash leads on 22 and GLM-5.2 Full Open Source leads on 29 — GLM-5.2 Full Open Source leads on more. Strengths differ by axis; the table below shows every head-to-head number with provenance.

SEEDRefresh Models —Deals —Regulatory —Sources —

DeepSeek-V4-Flash vs GLM-5.2 Full Open Source

DeepSeekvsZ.ai52 shared benchmarks22–29 head-to-head

Benchmark	DeepSeek-V4-Flash	GLM-5.2 Full Open Source
AA Agentic Index	61.3	45.7
AA Intelligence	51.8	52.6
AA-LCR	74.3	76.7
AA-Omniscience	-14.3	4.4
Agents' Last Exam	25.2	23.8
aime_2026	95.8	99.2
arc_agi_1	84	77
ARC-AGI-2	46	22.8
arena_elo	1439	1471
arena_text_factuality	1434	1460
Artificial Analysis Coding Index	69.1	68.8
AutomationBench (Public)	25.1	12.9
AutomationBench Public	25.1	12.9
coding_arena_elo	1431	1582
critpt	16.6	20.9
DeepSWE	54.4	46.2
DSBench-FullStack	68.7	61.8
DSBench-Hard	59.6	54.5
gdpval	52.9	50.3
GDPval-AA v2	1189	1514
Global-MMLU-Lite	88.4	89.2
GPQA Diamond	90.8	91.2
HLE	38.6	54.7
HLE (with tools)	45.1	54.7
HLE (wo / w tools)	51.5	54.7
hmmt_feb_2026	94.8	92.5
IFBench	79.2	73.3
imo_answer_bench	88.4	91
itbenchSre	31.5	42.7
livebench_agentic_coding	46.8	51.8
livebench_coding	75	79.7
livebench_data_analysis	79.3	73.7
livebench_instruction_following	65.5	62.3
livebench_language	79.2	76.2
livebench_math	86.8	89.8
livebench_reasoning	86.6	78.6
MCP Atlas	69	82.6
nl2repo	54.2	48.9
OmniScience Accuracy	40.4	24.3
OmniScience Non-Hallucination	15.6	73.7
scicode	49.9	50.5
simplebench	46.3	58.8
simpleqa_verified	45	38.1
strongreject	97.4	98.5
SWE-bench Pro	52.6	62.1
Tau 3 Banking	22.9	26.8
TauBench V3 - Banking	39.4	34.6
Terminal-Bench 2.1	82.7	82.7
Terminal-Bench Hard	38.6	50.8
toolathlon	70.3	48.2
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)	95.6	99.1
τ³-Bench	22.9	26.8

Best tracked score per model per benchmark (default configuration; source-attributed). ↓ marks lower-is-better metrics. Open either model for its full surface, provenance and pricing.