Head to head
Z.ai: GLM 5.2 vs Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6
Live prices, context windows, capabilities, and measured quality — updated continuously.
Side by side
| Metric | Z.ai: GLM 5.2 Z Ai | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic |
|---|---|---|
| Input $/M tokens | $0.462 | $5.00 |
| Output $/M tokens | $1.45 | $25.00 |
| Context window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Max output | 131K | 128K |
| WM Score | 85 | 83 |
| Benchmark quality | 82.5 | 82.7 |
| Hosts serving it | 27 | 4 |
| Throughput (tok/s) | 113 | 35 |
| Latency (ms) | 470 | 1556 |
| Vision | ||
| Tools | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| JSON mode |
Which should you pick?
Z.ai: GLM 5.2 costs less per million input tokens — about 10.8× cheaper than Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6. Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on measured quality. Z.ai: GLM 5.2 takes a larger context window, which matters for long documents or big codebases. Prices here are live list prices; the same model can cost less on a different host, so check the model page for the cheapest offering.