Model comparison

GLM-5.2 vs Sonar Pro

GLM-5.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); Sonar Pro 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

Sonar Pro Perplexity

—

Unranked

Summary

  • GLM-5.2 is cheaper at $1.40 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Sonar Pro.
  • GLM-5.2 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
  • GLM-5.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.2 and Sonar Pro specifications
GLM-5.2Sonar Pro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Perplexity
Noometry Index51.1—
Released2026-06-132024-01-01
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M200K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$3
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$15
Results tracked511

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41), Sonar Pro: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
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), Sonar Pro: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
APEX-Agents45.2%—
τ²-bench Banking37.1%—
PostTrainBench31.7%—
GBAEval0%—
LMArena Search—1130
Vending-Bench 28,314—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52), Sonar Pro: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
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), Sonar Pro: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
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), Sonar Pro: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
GPQA Diamond91.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34.2%—
LMArena Expert1486—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26), Sonar Pro: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
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), Sonar Pro: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
LMArena Instruction Following1465—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Sonar Pro: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
LMArena Longer Query1479—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21), Sonar Pro: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Sonar Pro
LMArena Text1470—
LMArena Creative Writing1462—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1757—
EQ-Bench 41222—
LMArena Multi-Turn1469—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than Sonar Pro?

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

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.2 or Sonar Pro?

GLM-5.2 is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Sonar Pro lists at $3 and $15.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.2 does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Sonar Pro share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Sonar Pro has 1.

Related comparisons

Go deeper