Skip to content
VECTOR WIREAI INTELLIGENCE
⌘K
UTC
Models760Deals30d252Policy30d61, 11 pendingSources1,057

DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 vs GLM-5.2

DeepSeek · released

Wins 6 of 7 areas

Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents · Following instructions

Z.ai · released

Wins 0 of 7 areas

—

DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 is the stronger all-rounder.

Scores updated · 40 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 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-Pro 0813$1.32 to read · $3.96 to write$5.28Price from Artificial Analysis
GLM-5.2$1.40 to read · $4.40 to write$5.80Price from Z.ai's own price page

DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 costs 9% less for the same work.

The biggest differences

The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.

Where DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 pulls ahead

  • Abstract visual puzzles that people can solveARC-AGI-2+38.5points aheadDeepSeek-V4-Pro 081361.3GLM-5.222.8
  • Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+24.8points aheadDeepSeek-V4-Pro 081349.1GLM-5.224.3
  • Short factual questions, answered correctlySimpleQA Verified+18.7points aheadDeepSeek-V4-Pro 081352.9GLM-5.234.2

Where GLM-5.2 pulls ahead

  • Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+68.5points aheadGLM-5.273.7DeepSeek-V4-Pro 08135.2
  • Research-level physics problemsCritPt+2.9points aheadGLM-5.220.9DeepSeek-V4-Pro 081318
  • Programming problems, refreshed regularlyLiveBench · Coding+2.5points aheadGLM-5.279.7DeepSeek-V4-Pro 081377.2

Every test, side by side

All 40 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.

CodingEven

Full coding ranking

AgentsDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813
  • Terminal-Bench 4.0DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 by 13.114.11+13.1
  • τ-Bench V3 · BankingDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 by 539.634.6+5
  • GDPValDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 by 3.947.543.6+3.9

Full agents ranking

ReasoningDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813

Full reasoning ranking

FactsDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813

Full facts ranking

MathDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813

Full math ranking

Long documentsDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813
  • AA-LCRDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 by 280.378.3+2

Full long documents ranking

Following instructionsDeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813

Full following instructions ranking

Other results20 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, DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 or GLM-5.2?

DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 wins six of the seven areas where both have results: agents, reasoning, facts, math, long documents and following instructions. GLM-5.2 wins none. They are level on coding.

Which is better for coding?

Neither. They win 1 coding test each of the 4 both models report, and 2 are ties.

Which is cheaper?

DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 costs $1.32 per million input tokens and $3.96 per million output tokens; GLM-5.2 costs $1.40 and $4.40. That makes DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0813 about 9% cheaper for the same work.

How do you compare the two?

We use the 40 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 20 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 20 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 GLM-5.2 with

Z.ai

Across the field

All comparisons