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

Jamba Large 1.7 vs GLM 5.2

Detailed technical comparison between Jamba Large 1.7 (AI21 Labs) and GLM 5.2 (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

Jamba Large 1.7: 0 WinsvsGLM 5.2: 6 Wins
Context Leader

GLM 5.2

1,048,576 tokens
Agentic Tool-Calling

Tie

Equal Capability
Lowest Latency (TTFT)

Tie

Equal Speed
Input Price Leader

GLM 5.2

$0.80 / MTok
AI21 Labsactive

Jamba Large 1.7

Jamba Large 1.7 is the latest model in the Jamba open family, offering improvements in grounding, instruction-following, and overall efficiency. Built on a hybrid SSM-Transformer architecture with a 256K context...

View Jamba Large 1.7 Full Specs →
Zhipu AIactive

GLM 5.2

GLM 5.2 is a large-scale reasoning model from Z.ai. It supports text input and output with a 1M-token context window, and is suited for long-horizon agent workflows, project-level software engineering,...

View GLM 5.2 Full Specs →

Technical Specifications

🏆 = Superior Spec
SpecificationJamba Large 1.7GLM 5.2
ProviderAI21 LabsZhipu AI
Context Window256,000 tokens1,048,576 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.)Beta Access (est.)
API AvailableYesYes
Released Date2025-08-082026-06-16

API Pricing Comparison

Input Price per Million Tokens

Jamba Large 1.7

$2.00

GLM 5.2

$0.80

Output Price per Million Tokens

Jamba Large 1.7

$8.00

GLM 5.2

$2.50

💡 Cost Ratio: GLM 5.2 is 2.5x cheaper per input token than Jamba Large 1.7.

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
87.8%vs89.5%+1.7% GLM 5.2
Jamba Large 1.7
GLM 5.2 🏆
HumanEvalPython coding & logic synthesis
87.0%vs91.2%+4.2% GLM 5.2
Jamba Large 1.7
GLM 5.2 🏆
MATHComplex mathematical problem solving
68.2%vs80.5%+12.3% GLM 5.2
Jamba Large 1.7
GLM 5.2 🏆
GPQAGraduate-level expert reasoning
49.6%vs53.5%+3.9% GLM 5.2
Jamba Large 1.7
GLM 5.2 🏆
HellaSwagCommonsense reasoning and inference
85.4%vs89.8%+4.4% GLM 5.2
Jamba Large 1.7
GLM 5.2 🏆
MT-BenchMulti-turn conversation flow quality
9.1%vs9.3%+0.2% GLM 5.2
Jamba Large 1.7
GLM 5.2 🏆

Jamba Large 1.7 Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

GLM 5.2 Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

Explore Other Popular Comparisons

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

Jamba Large 1.7 vs Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

Jamba Large 1.7 vs GLM 4.7 Flash

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

Jamba Large 1.7 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

Jamba Large 1.7 vs GPT-5.2-Codex

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

Jamba Large 1.7 vs DeepSeek V3.1

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

Jamba Large 1.7 vs Mistral Medium 3.1

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