BenchLeader

GLM-5.2 vs GLM-5.3

Verdict
  • GLM-5.3 (max) leads on quality: 65.8 vs 63.9.
  • GLM-5.2 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, instruction following, reasoning.
  • GLM-5.3 (max) is stronger in coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, long context, maths.
  • They cost about the same ($2.15 per 1M blended).
MetricGLM-5.2 (max)GLM-5.3 (max)
BenchLeader Index63.965.8
Agents & tools score63.862.0
Coding score63.864.4
Composite score72.185.9
Human preference score67.268.5
Instruction following score71.6
Knowledge score55.559.6
Long context score65.666.3
Maths score59.062.7
Reasoning score72.971.6
Blended price $/M$2.15$2.15
Output speed71 tok/s63 tok/s
Time to first answer31.6 s34.6 s
Context window1M1M
GPQA Diamond91.9%90.9%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–359.2%68.8%
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%29.3%
OTIS Mock AIME86.4%91.1%
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)78.7%
SimpleQA Verified34.2%41.0%
Terminal-Bench41.8%
SciCode50.5%56.5%
WeirdML70.1%75.4%
ProofBench35.0%49.0%
LMArena Text14721483
LMArena Hard Prompts14931507
LMArena Coding15101524
LMArena WebDev15921614
LMArena Agent4.43.1
AA Intelligence Index34.044.9
IFBench73.3%
AA-LCR78.3%79.7%
AA-Omniscience4.414.3
Terminal-Bench Hard50.8%
GPQA Diamond (AA)89.5%91.7%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)41.1%42.3%
SciCode (AA)51.2%59.0%
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)99.1%
LiveCodeBench80.5%
MMLU-Pro86.8%
IOI68.4%
LegalBench84.8%
TaxEval72.4%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)67.8%71.5%
SWE-bench (Vals)82.8%95.4%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)88.1%
Vals Index57.0
CritPt20.9%19.1%
GDPval (AA)45.3%56.7%
τ²-Bench Banking (AA)34.6%50.3%
ITBench SRE (AA)42.7%
APEX-Agents (AA)33.7%
Code Migration37.9%44.2%
Excel Modeling Benchmark56.3%
Finance Agent v255.8%
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark7.1%8.3%
Legal Research Bench31.3%49.0%
MedCode42.9%
MedScribe88.8%
MysteryMechanism23.0%
ProgramBench0.5%1.5%
Public Benefits Bench68.5%
SkillsBench45.1%47.5%
SREBench0.0%
Tax Agent Bench73.1%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)25.3%
Terminal-Bench Science4.3%
Vibe Code Bench 1-10020.0%
Vibe Code Bench v1.164.0%78.1%
FORTRESS28.2%
LMArena Maths14801504
LMArena Creative Writing14511462
LMArena Instruction Following14661480
LMArena Multi-turn14691493
LMArena Longer Queries14831492
Chess Puzzles21.0%21.0%
EBR-bench9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles33.0%
PostTrainBench31.7%
DeepSWE43.8%69.0%
LMCA45.8%
DTBench93.6%
CursorBench55.0%
ALE-Bench1010.2
FrontierSWE30.2%

Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

GLM-5.2 vs GLM-5.3: questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.3 (max) leads on quality: 65.8 vs 63.9. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GLM-5.3 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
Is GLM-5.2 better than GLM-5.3 for coding?
GLM-5.3 scores higher in coding (64 vs 64 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Is GLM-5.2 better than GLM-5.3 for agentic tasks?
GLM-5.2 scores higher in agentic tasks (64 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.2 or GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.2 is cheaper: $2.15 against $2.15 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
Which is faster, GLM-5.2 or GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.2 streams faster: 71 against 63 output tokens per second.
Which has the larger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens of context.