← Back to Model Hub/SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW
SHARE THIS:

GPT-5.2 Chat vs GLM 4.7 Flash

Detailed technical comparison between GPT-5.2 Chat (OpenAI) and GLM 4.7 Flash (Zhipu AI). Review live API token pricing, context window capabilities, time-to-first-token latency, and verified benchmark scores side-by-side.

⚡ Executive Summary & Verdict

Comparison Snapshot

GPT-5.2 Chat: 6 WinsvsGLM 4.7 Flash: 0 Wins
Context Leader

GLM 4.7 Flash

202,752 tokens
Agentic Tool-Calling

Tie

Equal Capability
Lowest Latency (TTFT)

Tie

Equal Speed
Input Price Leader

GLM 4.7 Flash

$0.06 / MTok
OpenAIactive

GPT-5.2 Chat

GPT-5.2 Chat (AKA Instant) is the fast, lightweight member of the 5.2 family, optimized for low-latency chat while retaining strong general intelligence. It uses adaptive reasoning to selectively “think” on...

View GPT-5.2 Chat Full Specs →
Zhipu AIactive

GLM 4.7 Flash

As a 30B-class SOTA model, GLM-4.7-Flash offers a new option that balances performance and efficiency. It is further optimized for agentic coding use cases, strengthening coding capabilities, long-horizon task planning,...

View GLM 4.7 Flash Full Specs →

Technical Specifications

🏆 = Superior Spec
SpecificationGPT-5.2 ChatGLM 4.7 Flash
ProviderOpenAIZhipu AI
Context Window128,000 tokens202,752 tokens🏆
Agent SuitabilityNot yet benchmarkedNot yet benchmarked
Time to First Token (TTFT)No public TTFT dataNo public TTFT data
Deployment Modelmanaged apimanaged api
Production StabilityStable GA (est.)Stable GA (est.)
API AvailableYesYes
Released Date2025-12-102026-01-19

API Pricing Comparison

Input Price per Million Tokens

GPT-5.2 Chat

$1.75

GLM 4.7 Flash

$0.06

Output Price per Million Tokens

GPT-5.2 Chat

$14.00

GLM 4.7 Flash

$0.40

💡 Cost Ratio: GLM 4.7 Flash is 29.2x cheaper per input token than GPT-5.2 Chat.

Want to test both models live?

Run side-by-side prompt benchmarks in our dynamic multi-model Sandbox. Compare execution speeds, latency metrics, and compute actual costs in real-time.

Open Live Sandbox Playground →

Benchmark Performance Metrics

Standardized Scores (0–100%)

Scores show verified raw accuracy percentages across standardized AI evaluation suites. Higher bars indicate superior performance in that domain.

MMLUGeneral knowledge & multi-task understanding
90.4%vs77.2%+13.2% GPT-5.2 Chat
GPT-5.2 Chat 🏆
GLM 4.7 Flash
HumanEvalPython coding & logic synthesis
91.6%vs78.5%+13.1% GPT-5.2 Chat
GPT-5.2 Chat 🏆
GLM 4.7 Flash
MATHComplex mathematical problem solving
78.8%vs40.0%+38.8% GPT-5.2 Chat
GPT-5.2 Chat 🏆
GLM 4.7 Flash
GPQAGraduate-level expert reasoning
57.2%vs31.0%+26.2% GPT-5.2 Chat
GPT-5.2 Chat 🏆
GLM 4.7 Flash
HellaSwagCommonsense reasoning and inference
89.4%vs80.0%+9.4% GPT-5.2 Chat
GPT-5.2 Chat 🏆
GLM 4.7 Flash
MT-BenchMulti-turn conversation flow quality
9.2%vs8.1%+1.1% GPT-5.2 Chat
GPT-5.2 Chat 🏆
GLM 4.7 Flash

GPT-5.2 Chat Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

GLM 4.7 Flash Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

Explore Other Popular Comparisons

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GPT-5.2 Chat vs Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GPT-5.2 Chat vs GLM 5.2

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GPT-5.2 Chat vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GPT-5.2 Chat vs GPT-5.2-Codex

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GPT-5.2 Chat vs DeepSeek V3.1

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GPT-5.2 Chat vs Mistral Medium 3.1

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.