Helix 02 vs GLM 5.2

At a Glance

Compare
Helix 02Figure
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
Context windowMaximum documented tokensNot reported1,049K
Model facts checkedAug 29, 2026View model evidence →Aug 28, 2026View model evidence →
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

FieldHelix 02GLM-5.2
DeveloperFigureZ.ai
FamilyHelixGlm 5 2
ModelHelix 02GLM-5.2
Version02GLM-5.2
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-01-05Unknown
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, Image, Robot stateText
Output modalitiesRobot actionText
Context windowUnknown1,049K
Total parametersUnknown753.3B
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownmit
Open weightsNoYes
API availableNoYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessUnknownDeepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitiesdexterous-manipulation, long-horizon-control, tactile-control, whole-body-controlchat, generation, reasoning, tools
Robotics model typeVision-language-action modelUnknown
Action representationFull-body joint targetsUnknown
Control architectureSemantic reasoning, visuomotor policy, and kHz whole-body controllerUnknown
Inference locationOn deviceUnknown
Native control rate (Hz)UnknownUnknown
Supported embodimentsFigure 03Unknown
Training dataFigure reports more than 1,000 hours of human motion data plus sim-to-real reinforcement learning for its whole-body controller.Unknown

Helix 02 Capabilities

dexterous-manipulationlong-horizon-controltactile-controlwhole-body-control
Model typeVision-language-action model
InferenceOn device
Action representationFull-body joint targets
Supported embodiments1
Canonical IDfigure/helix-02

GLM 5.2 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Model typeUnknown
InferenceUnknown
Action representationUnknown
Supported embodimentsUnknown
Canonical IDzai-org/GLM-5.2

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Helix 02 vs GLM 5.2 FAQs

Is Helix 02 or GLM 5.2 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Helix 02 and GLM 5.2, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Helix 02 or GLM 5.2?+

Only GLM 5.2 has a directly sourced input price: $0.75 per million tokens. Only GLM 5.2 has a directly sourced output price: $2.40 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Helix 02 or GLM 5.2?+

Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Helix 02 is — and GLM 5.2 is 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Helix 02 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 Helix 02 or GLM 5.2 be self-hosted?+

GLM 5.2 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Helix 02 is not marked open weight; GLM 5.2 is open weight.

Can Helix 02 and GLM 5.2 understand images?+

Helix 02 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, Helix 02 or GLM 5.2?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Helix 02 is — and GLM 5.2 is —.

Do Helix 02 and GLM 5.2 support reasoning and tool use?+

Helix 02: image input. GLM 5.2: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Helix 02 or GLM 5.2?+

Helix 02 has 0 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.2 has 5, so GLM 5.2 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Helix 02 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