GPT-5.2 Pro vs GLM 5.3

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.
FieldAt a Glance
OpenAI · activeGPT-5.2 ProVerified Sep 3, 2026
Z.ai · activeGLM 5.3Verified Aug 29, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldGPT-5.2 ProGLM-5.3
DeveloperOpenAIZ.ai
FamilyGpt 5 2Glm 5 3
ModelGPT-5.2 ProGLM-5.3
VersionGPT-5.2 ProGLM-5.3
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2025-12-11Unknown
Knowledge cutoff2025-08-31Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window400K1,000K
Total parametersUnknownUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownUnknown
Open weightsNoNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoNo
Provider accessOpenai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolsagents, chat, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

13 comparable fields · 8 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

GPT-5.2 Pro Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price$21.00
Output price$168.00
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-5.2-pro

GLM 5.3 Capabilities

agentschatreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price$1.20
Output price$4.00
Serving providers4
Canonical IDzai-org/glm-5.3

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All text comparisons →
APairBContext
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

GPT-5.2 Pro vs GLM 5.3 FAQs

Is GPT-5.2 Pro or GLM 5.3 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both GPT-5.2 Pro and GLM 5.3, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 Pro or GLM 5.3?+

GPT-5.2 Pro is $21.00 and GLM 5.3 is $1.20 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 is cheaper on this metric. GPT-5.2 Pro is $168.00 and GLM 5.3 is $4.00 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, GPT-5.2 Pro or GLM 5.3?+

GLM 5.3 has the larger sourced context window. GPT-5.2 Pro supports 400K and GLM 5.3 supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, GPT-5.2 Pro or GLM 5.3?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can GPT-5.2 Pro or GLM 5.3 be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. GPT-5.2 Pro is not marked open weight; GLM 5.3 is not marked open weight.

Can GPT-5.2 Pro and GLM 5.3 understand images?+

GPT-5.2 Pro is documented with image input; GLM 5.3 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, GPT-5.2 Pro or GLM 5.3?+

GLM 5.3 has the larger sourced maximum output: GPT-5.2 Pro supports 128K and GLM 5.3 supports 131K output tokens.

Do GPT-5.2 Pro and GLM 5.3 support reasoning and tool use?+

GPT-5.2 Pro: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM 5.3: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, GPT-5.2 Pro or GLM 5.3?+

GPT-5.2 Pro has 2 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.3 has 4, so GLM 5.3 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, GPT-5.2 Pro or GLM 5.3?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback