GLM-5.2 vs GPT-5.1
Wins 3 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning
Wins 2 of 6 areas
Facts · Long documents
GLM-5.2 wins more areas, narrowly.GPT-5.1 is better at facts.
Scores updated · 24 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six 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.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking50GLM-5.25 of 5 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software40GLM-5.24 of 4 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own20GLM-5.22 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up12GPT-5.12 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01GPT-5.11 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked00Even0 each · 1 tie
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.
GLM-5.2 costs 48% 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
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+27.2points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+25.6points ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+25.5points ahead
Where GPT-5.1 pulls ahead
- Short factual questions, answered correctlySimpleQA Verified+13.8points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+13.4points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+1.7points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 24 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGLM-5.2
- Terminal-Bench 2.1GLM-5.2 by 25.577.952.4+25.5
- LMArena · WebDevGLM-5.2 by 208 rating points16031395+208 rating
- SciCodeGLM-5.2 by 7.951.243.3+7.9
- Terminal-Bench HardGLM-5.2 by 5.350.845.5+5.3
AgentsGLM-5.2
- GDPValGLM-5.2 by 27.243.716.5+27.2
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingGLM-5.2 by 18.734.615.9+18.7
ReasoningGLM-5.2
- CritPtGLM-5.2 by 1620.94.9+16
- Humanity's Last ExamGLM-5.2 by 12.641.128.5+12.6
- SimpleBenchGLM-5.2 by 5.658.853.2+5.6
- ARC-AGI-2GLM-5.2 by 5.222.817.6+5.2
- GPQA DiamondGLM-5.2 by 2.289.587.3+2.2
FactsGPT-5.1
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGLM-5.2 by 25.673.748.1+25.6
- SimpleQA VerifiedGPT-5.1 by 13.834.248+13.8
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGPT-5.1 by 13.424.337.7+13.4
Other results8 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.
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGLM-5.2 by 19.468.849.4+19.4
- AA Agentic IndexGLM-5.2 by 17.839.421.6+17.8
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)GLM-5.2 by 17.299.181.9+17.2
- HLE (with tools)GLM-5.2 by 1254.742.7+12
- AA IntelligenceGLM-5.2 by 933.724.7+9
- ARC-AGI-1GLM-5.2 by 4.27772.8+4.2
- HMMT Nov. 2025GLM-5.2 by 2.794.491.7+2.7
- AA-OmniscienceGPT-5.1 by 14.45.4+1
Questions people ask
Which is better, GLM-5.2 or GPT-5.1?
GLM-5.2 wins three of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents and reasoning. GPT-5.1 wins facts and long documents. They are level on following instructions.
Which is better for coding?
GLM-5.2. It wins 4 of the 4 coding tests both models report; GPT-5.1 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
GLM-5.2 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1 costs $1.25 and $10.00. That makes GLM-5.2 about 48% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 24 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 16 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 8 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.