MiniMax-M3 vs GLM-5.2
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M3 | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,435.2098% of row best · rating · minimax-m3; 95% CI [1430.86827835, 1439.53977389]; votes 44544; rank 77 | 1,466.80100% of row best · rating · glm-5.2-max; 95% CI [1462.10739564, 1471.49788772]; votes 33758; rank 26 |
| LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader | 70.2691% of row best · percent · minimax-m3 · 15,530 output tokens / case | 76.96100% of row best · percent · glm-5.2 · 23,463 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 0 benchmark wins | 2 benchmark winsOverall lead |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | MiniMax-M3 | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | MiniMax | Z.ai |
| Family | Minimax M3 | Glm 5 2 |
| Model | MiniMax-M3 | GLM-5.2 |
| Version | MiniMax-M3 | GLM-5.2 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-06-01 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,048,576 | 1,048,576 |
| Total parameters | 427,040,140,160 | 753,329,940,480 |
| Active parameters | 23,000,000,000 | Unknown |
| License | other | mit |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
15 comparable fields · 7 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
MiniMax-M3 Capabilities
GLM-5.2 Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text |
MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs |  Mistral-Small-4-119B-2603Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
GLM-5Z.ai | vs | GLM-5.2Z.ai | family variantstext |
GLM-5.1Z.ai | vs | GLM-5.2Z.ai | family variantstext |
MiniMax-M2.7MiniMax | vs | MiniMax-M3MiniMax | family variantstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs | MiniMax-M3MiniMax | family variantstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
MiniMax-M3 vs GLM-5.2 FAQs
Is MiniMax-M3 or GLM-5.2 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both MiniMax-M3 and GLM-5.2, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M3 or GLM-5.2?+
MiniMax-M3 is $0.28 and GLM-5.2 is $0.75 per million tokens, so MiniMax-M3 is cheaper on this metric. MiniMax-M3 is $1.10 and GLM-5.2 is $2.40 per million tokens, so MiniMax-M3 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, MiniMax-M3 or GLM-5.2?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. MiniMax-M3 is 1,048,576 and GLM-5.2 is 1,048,576.
Which performs better in benchmarks, MiniMax-M3 or GLM-5.2?+
GLM-5.2 leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 2 protocol-matched benchmarks from 2 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.
Can MiniMax-M3 or GLM-5.2 be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. MiniMax-M3 is open weight; GLM-5.2 is open weight.
Can MiniMax-M3 and GLM-5.2 understand images?+
MiniMax-M3 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, MiniMax-M3 or GLM-5.2?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. MiniMax-M3 is — and GLM-5.2 is —.
Do MiniMax-M3 and GLM-5.2 support reasoning and tool use?+
MiniMax-M3: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM-5.2: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, MiniMax-M3 or GLM-5.2?+
MiniMax-M3 has 5 sourced provider routes; GLM-5.2 has 5, a tie.
Which offers better value, MiniMax-M3 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.