Model comparison

GLM-5.2 vs Pixtral 12B

GLM-5.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); Pixtral 12B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Pixtral 12B Mistral AI

31.3

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • Pixtral 12B is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.2.
  • GLM-5.2 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

GLM-5.2 and Pixtral 12B specifications
GLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Mistral AI
Noometry Index51.131.3
Released2026-06-132024-09-01
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$0.15
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$0.15
Results tracked512

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41), Pixtral 12B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
DeepSWE43.8%—
FrontierCode24.5%—
LMArena WebDev1603—
SciCode50.5%—
WeirdML70.1%—
LMArena Coding1485—
ALE-Bench1,047—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63), Pixtral 12B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
APEX-Agents45.2%—
τ²-bench Banking37.1%—
PostTrainBench31.7%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 28,314—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52), Pixtral 12B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
ARC-AGI-222.8%—
SimpleBench58.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)74.3%—
ARC-AGI-177%—
CritPt20.9%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
EBR-Bench9.5%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1480—
Mystery Game Puzzles19%—
DTBench93.6%—
LMCA45.8%—
Surface Evolver Bench55.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.78—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43), Pixtral 12B: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.4%—
ProofBench35%—
LMArena Math1482—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40), Pixtral 12B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
GPQA Diamond91.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34.2%—
LMArena Expert1486—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.2: —, Pixtral 12B: 23.9 (#127)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
LMArena Vision—1009
GeoBench—37%

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26), Pixtral 12B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
LMArena Non-English1459—
LMArena Chinese1519—
LMArena French1479—
LMArena German1468—
LMArena Japanese1451—
LMArena Korean1445—
LMArena Russian1466—
LMArena Spanish1477—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34), Pixtral 12B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
LMArena Instruction Following1465—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Pixtral 12B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
LMArena Longer Query1479—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21), Pixtral 12B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Pixtral 12B
LMArena Text1470—
LMArena Creative Writing1462—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1757—
EQ-Bench 41222—
LMArena Multi-Turn1469—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than Pixtral 12B?

GLM-5.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); Pixtral 12B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.2 or Pixtral 12B?

Pixtral 12B is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; GLM-5.2 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.2 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Pixtral 12B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Pixtral 12B has 2.

Related comparisons

Go deeper