GPT-Image 2.5 Flare vs GLM 5.2

At a Glance

Compare
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort#23 of 4661.9 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 41.3–74.6
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort#12 of 44$0.056 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort#7 of 3861.3 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 51.0–67.6
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$5.00Openai · Sep 9, 2026$0.75Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$30.00Openai · Sep 9, 2026$2.40Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokensNot reported1,049K
Model facts checkedSep 9, 2026View model evidence →Aug 28, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Different Model RolesThese models do not share a sourced market category. Their primary-source facts remain comparable below, while performance claims require matched evidence.

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldGPT-Image-2.5 FlareGLM-5.2
DeveloperOpenAIZ.ai
FamilyGpt Image 2 5Glm 5 2
ModelGPT-Image-2.5 FlareGLM-5.2
VersionGPT-Image-2.5 FlareGLM-5.2
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-09-08Unknown
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesImageText
Context windowUnknown1,049K
Total parametersUnknown753.3B
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownmit
Open weightsUnknownYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableUnknownYes
Provider accessOpenai (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitiesimage-editing, image-generation, inpaintingchat, generation, reasoning, tools
Default usage-tier rate limitsTier 1: 100,000 TPM, 5 IPM, Tier 2: 250,000 TPM, 20 IPM, Tier 3: 800,000 TPM, 50 IPM, Tier 4: 3,000,000 TPM, 150 IPM, Tier 5: 8,000,000 TPM, 250 IPMUnknown
Default snapshotgpt-image-2.5-flare-2026-09-08Unknown
Model positioningFast, high-quality everyday image generationUnknown
Quality settingslow, medium, high, xhigh, max, autoUnknown
Supported API routesv1/images/generations, v1/images/editsUnknown
Unsupported API routesv1/assistants, v1/audio/speech, v1/audio/transcriptions, v1/audio/translations, v1/batch, v1/chat/completions, v1/completions, v1/embeddings, v1/fine-tuning, v1/moderations, v1/realtime, v1/realtime/transcription_sessions, v1/realtime/translations, v1/responses, v1/videosUnknown

GPT-Image 2.5 Flare Capabilities

image-editingimage-generationinpainting
Serving providers1
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-image-2.5-flare

GLM 5.2 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers5
Canonical IDzai-org/GLM-5.2

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

GPT-Image 2.5 Flare vs GLM 5.2 FAQs

Is GPT-Image 2.5 Flare or GLM 5.2 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both GPT-Image 2.5 Flare and GLM 5.2, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, GPT-Image 2.5 Flare or GLM 5.2?+

GPT-Image 2.5 Flare is $5.00 and GLM 5.2 is $0.75 per million tokens, so GLM 5.2 is cheaper on this metric. GPT-Image 2.5 Flare is $30.00 and GLM 5.2 is $2.40 per million tokens, so GLM 5.2 is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, GPT-Image 2.5 Flare or GLM 5.2?+

Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. GPT-Image 2.5 Flare is — and GLM 5.2 is 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, GPT-Image 2.5 Flare or GLM 5.2?+

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

Can GPT-Image 2.5 Flare or GLM 5.2 be self-hosted?+

GLM 5.2 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. GPT-Image 2.5 Flare is of unknown open-weight status; GLM 5.2 is open weight.

Can GPT-Image 2.5 Flare and GLM 5.2 understand images?+

GPT-Image 2.5 Flare is documented with image input; GLM 5.2 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, GPT-Image 2.5 Flare or GLM 5.2?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. GPT-Image 2.5 Flare is — and GLM 5.2 is —.

Do GPT-Image 2.5 Flare and GLM 5.2 support reasoning and tool use?+

GPT-Image 2.5 Flare: image input. GLM 5.2: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, GPT-Image 2.5 Flare or GLM 5.2?+

GPT-Image 2.5 Flare has 1 sourced provider route; GLM 5.2 has 5, so GLM 5.2 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, GPT-Image 2.5 Flare or GLM 5.2?+

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