Model comparison
GLM-5.2 vs Grok 4 Fast
GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 39.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.2 scores higher in 8 categories and Grok 4 Fast in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.2 leads 57.1 to 31.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 77% for GLM-5.2 and 48.5% for Grok 4 Fast.
- GLM-5.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 50.9 | 39.0 |
| Released | 2026-06-13 | 2025-09-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | — |
| Results tracked | 50 | 30 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 50.9 (#37), Grok 4 Fast: 32.3 (#264)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1604 | 1160 |
| WeirdML | 70.1% | 42.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1484 | 1429 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 78.7% | — |
| DeepSWE | 43.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 24.5% | — |
| SciCode | 50.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,047 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 31.6 (#63), Grok 4 Fast: 29.3 (#80)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench Banking | 37.1% | 15.7% |
| Cybench | — | 30% |
| PostTrainBench | 31.7% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| LMArena Search | — | 1171 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8,314 | — |
Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 42.1 (#46), Grok 4 Fast: 22.5 (#179)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 22.8% | 5.3% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 62.6% | 66.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 77% | 48.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1480 | 1413 |
| DTBench | 93.6% | 82.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.76 | 144.21 |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 74.3% | — |
| CritPt | 20.9% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 21% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 9.5% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | — |
| LMCA | 45.8% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 55.6% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.5 |
Math GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 55.4 (#35), Grok 4 Fast: 36.1 (#126)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1482 | 1419 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 59.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.4% | — |
| ProofBench | 35% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#36), Grok 4 Fast: 31.5 (#211)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1484 | 1411 |
| GPQA Diamond | 91.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 19.7% |
Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 56.0 (#25), Grok 4 Fast: 51.5 (#106)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1459 | 1397 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1518 | 1458 |
| LMArena French | 1476 | 1433 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1383 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1451 | 1358 |
| LMArena Korean | 1445 | 1359 |
| LMArena Russian | 1467 | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1477 | 1414 |
Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 77.1 (#32), Grok 4 Fast: 73.4 (#116)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1465 | 1388 |
Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads
GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | 1415 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 94.4% |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads
GLM-5.2: 70.7 (#20), Grok 4 Fast: 60.2 (#96)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Grok 4 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1470 | 1407 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | 1388 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1468 | 1414 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1757 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1222 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.2 better than Grok 4 Fast?
GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 39.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-5.2 or Grok 4 Fast better for coding?
GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.9 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Grok 4 Fast share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 50 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4 Fast has 30.