Claude Opus 4.6 vs GLM-5.2
Claude Opus 4.6 
GLM-5.2 Verdict
- Claude Opus 4.6 and GLM-5.2 (max) are level on quality (63.7 vs 63.9).
- Claude Opus 4.6 is stronger in agents & tools, maths, multimodal.
- GLM-5.2 (max) is stronger in coding, human preference, reasoning, composite, instruction following, knowledge, long context.
- GLM-5.2 (max) is 4.7× cheaper ($2.15 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
- GLM-5.2 (max) streams 2.1× faster (71 vs 34 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.6 | GLM-5.2 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.7 | 63.9 |
| Agents & tools score | 67.8 | 63.8 |
| Coding score | 62.3 | 63.8 |
| Human preference score | 64.7 | 67.2 |
| Maths score | 68.7 | 59.0 |
| Multimodal score | 67.0 | – |
| Reasoning score | 62.6 | 72.9 |
| Composite score | – | 72.1 |
| Instruction following score | – | 71.6 |
| Knowledge score | – | 55.5 |
| Long context score | – | 65.6 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $2.15 |
| Output speed | 34 tok/s | 71 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 1.7 s | 31.6 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | 91.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 59.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 29.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 94.4% | 86.4% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | 78.7% | 78.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 34.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 19.0% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 79.8% | – |
| SimpleBench | 67.6% | – |
| SciCode | – | 50.5% |
| Cybench | 93.0% | – |
| Remote Labor Index | 4.2% | – |
| WeirdML | 77.9% | 70.1% |
| APEX-Agents | 32.4% | – |
| FrontierCode | 26.6% | – |
| ProofBench | – | 35.0% |
| GSO-Bench | 33.3% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.3 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1497 | 1472 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1527 | 1493 |
| LMArena Coding | 1546 | 1510 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1537 | 1592 |
| LMArena Vision | 1312 | – |
| LMArena Agent | – | 4.4 |
| AA Intelligence Index | – | 34.0 |
| IFBench | – | 73.3% |
| AA-LCR | – | 78.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | – | 4.4 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 50.8% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 89.5% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | – | 41.1% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 51.2% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 99.1% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | 67.8% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 82.8% |
| HiL-Bench | 38.3% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1223 | – |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.4% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 75.6% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | 75.6% | – |
| CritPt | – | 20.9% |
| GDPval (AA) | – | 45.3% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | – | 34.6% |
| ITBench SRE (AA) | – | 42.7% |
| APEX-Agents (AA) | – | 33.7% |
| Code Migration | – | 37.9% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark | – | 7.1% |
| Legal Research Bench | – | 31.3% |
| MedCode | 48.2% | – |
| MedScribe | 86.7% | – |
| ProgramBench | – | 0.5% |
| SkillsBench | – | 45.1% |
| SREBench | – | 0.0% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | 57.6% | 64.0% |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA | 33.3% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoring | 35.6% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writing | 36.7% | – |
| LMArena Maths | 1507 | 1480 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1479 | 1451 |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1500 | 1466 |
| LMArena Multi-turn | 1511 | 1469 |
| LMArena Longer Queries | 1517 | 1483 |
| LMArena Document | 1494 | – |
| Chess Puzzles | 17.0% | 21.0% |
| EBR-bench | – | 9.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 15.0% | – |
| PostTrainBench | – | 31.7% |
| CL-bench | 20.7% | – |
| CL-bench Life | 13.6% | – |
| METR Time Horizons | 78.9% | – |
| DeepSWE | – | 43.8% |
| LMCA | – | 45.8% |
| DTBench | – | 93.6% |
| ForecastBench | 60.0% | – |
| CursorBench | – | 55.0% |
| GBAEval | 44.1% | – |
| ALE-Bench | 996.5 | 1010.2 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8017.6 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 4.6 vs GLM-5.2: questions
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than GLM-5.2?
- Claude Opus 4.6 and GLM-5.2 (max) are level on quality (63.7 vs 63.9). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GLM-5.2 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than GLM-5.2 for coding?
- GLM-5.2 scores higher in coding (64 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than GLM-5.2 for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in agentic tasks (68 vs 64 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or GLM-5.2?
- GLM-5.2 is cheaper: $2.15 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.6 or GLM-5.2?
- GLM-5.2 streams faster: 71 against 34 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.