Ternary Bonsai 1.7B 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 tokensNot reported$0.75Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokensNot reported$2.40Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens33K1,049K
Model facts checkedSep 18, 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 →

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

FieldTernary Bonsai 1.7BGLM-5.2
DeveloperPrismMLZ.ai
FamilyBonsai 1 7bGlm 5 2
ModelTernary Bonsai 1.7BGLM-5.2
VersionTernary Bonsai 1.7BGLM-5.2
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-04-18Unknown
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window33K1,049K
Total parameters1.7B753.3B
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0mit
Open weightsYesYes
API availableNoYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessUnknownDeepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generationchat, generation, reasoning, tools
Effective bit width1.58 bits per weightUnknown
Weight size0.46 GBUnknown
Weight formatTernary Q2_0Unknown

Ternary Bonsai 1.7B Capabilities

chatgeneration
Serving providers0
Canonical IDprism-ml/Ternary-Bonsai-1.7B

GLM 5.2 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers5
Canonical IDzai-org/GLM-5.2

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Ternary Bonsai 1.7B vs GLM 5.2 FAQs

Is Ternary Bonsai 1.7B or GLM 5.2 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Ternary Bonsai 1.7B and GLM 5.2, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Ternary Bonsai 1.7B 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, Ternary Bonsai 1.7B or GLM 5.2?+

GLM 5.2 has the larger sourced context window. Ternary Bonsai 1.7B supports 33K and GLM 5.2 supports 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Ternary Bonsai 1.7B 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 Ternary Bonsai 1.7B or GLM 5.2 be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Ternary Bonsai 1.7B is open weight; GLM 5.2 is open weight.

Can Ternary Bonsai 1.7B and GLM 5.2 understand images?+

Ternary Bonsai 1.7B is not 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, Ternary Bonsai 1.7B or GLM 5.2?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Ternary Bonsai 1.7B is — and GLM 5.2 is —.

Do Ternary Bonsai 1.7B and GLM 5.2 support reasoning and tool use?+

Ternary Bonsai 1.7B: none of these features are definitively sourced. GLM 5.2: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Ternary Bonsai 1.7B or GLM 5.2?+

Ternary Bonsai 1.7B has 0 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.2 has 5, so GLM 5.2 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Ternary Bonsai 1.7B 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