Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026
In this head-to-head showdown, Claude Sonnet 4.5 delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,524 vs 1,492), while Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (70.1%), while GLM-5.2 is more budget-friendly at $3.74/1M per 1M output tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4.5 provides faster response streaming (88 tok/s). Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.
10 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost
Workhorse Anthropic model: most of Opus coding quality at a mid-tier price.
Zhipu flagship. Strong Chinese/English coding and agents.
Currently comparing Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM-5.2. Alternative family tiers available.
Δ 32 Arena Elo pts
88 tok/s
$3.74 / 1M output
Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.
Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.
Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.
Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy
Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness
Cost per million tokens and max context window length
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | GLM-5.2 | Advantage Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preference Elo | +32 | ||
| Coding Elo | +27 | ||
| LiveBench | +2.2% | ||
| SWE-bench | +0.8% | ||
| GPQA Diamond | +0.7% | ||
| Time to first token | +30 ms | ||
| Output speed | 88 tok/s | 84 tok/s | +4 tok/s |
| Input price | $1.19/1M | +$1.81/1M | |
| Output price | $3.74/1M | +$11.26/1M | |
| Context window | +49k |
Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).
GLM-5.2 is estimated to save $232.25/month ($2,787/year).
Higher SWE-bench (70.1%).
Lower output list price ($3.74/1M).
Lower TTFT (240 ms).
Larger window (1M).
Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Claude Sonnet 4.5).
| Target Workload | Recommended Pick | Evaluation Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Repo / coding agents | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Higher SWE-bench (70.1%). |
| High-volume chat | GLM-5.2 | Lower output list price ($3.74/1M). |
| Voice / low-latency UI | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Lower TTFT (240 ms). |
| Long-document RAG | GLM-5.2 | Larger window (1M). |
| Screenshots / vision | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Claude Sonnet 4.5). |
GLM-5.2 undercuts GLM 5V Turbo by 74.2% on input at $0.31/1M, with 1,492 Elo and 69.3% SWE-bench in dated 2026 snapshots.
Strong Chinese/English coding. 5.3 is the new row; 5.2 stays so the delta is visible.
Most of Opus 4.5 coding at a mid-tier price. Sonnet 5 replaced it as the buy; 4.5 remains a compare baseline.
No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!
Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/claude-sonnet-4-5-vs-glm-5-2/opengraph-image
Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry