新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,无需绑卡。

Claude Sonnet 5 vs GLM-5.2

vs

什么时候选哪个

两个模型都有 1,000,000 token 上下文窗口,都可关闭思考,所以真正的分野是模态和价目表:claude-sonnet-5 接受图像和文本输入,每百万 token 收 $2 输入 / $10 输出;glm-5.2 只接受文本,$1.4 输入 / $4.4 输出,输入便宜约 1.4 倍、输出便宜 2.3 倍。需要图像输入或它明确的思考能力时选 claude-sonnet-5,并注意它的缓存读取更便宜,$0.2 对 $0.26;大批量文本和长上下文工作选 glm-5.2,更低的 token 单价和 131072 最大输出 token 更重要。

Benchmark 成绩

领先高于同类均值无更高分Claude Sonnet 534 / 211 / 21GLM-5.2225 / 801 / 80

5 项两边都有成绩。

Claude Sonnet 5 GLM-5.2 其他参测模型 同类均值 ★ 没有模型得分更高
DeepSWE 1.1
53.8%
46.2%
BioMysteryBench hard
34.1%
N/A
OSWorld 2.0 Partial score, batch tool enabled
42.6%
N/A
Cybergym
N/A
77.2%
Finance Agent v2
53.9%
49.7%
Harvey Lab-AA
90.1%
91%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
91.2%
Agents' Last Exam
N/A
23.8%
LVBench
68.5%
N/A

供应商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

价格

Claude Sonnet 5 GLM-5.2 Δ
输入 / 1M token $2 $1.4 1.4×
输出 / 1M token $10 $4.4 2.3×
缓存读取 / 1M token $0.2 $0.26 0.77×
缓存写入 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) - -

价格取自构建时的实时目录,最新价格见各模型页面。

两个模型所处的位置:全部 76 个按同一单位计费的聊天模型的每 1M token 输入价分布(对数刻度)

Claude Sonnet 5 · $2 GLM-5.2 · $1.4
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

Claude Sonnet 5 GLM-5.2
工具调用 是 是
思考控制 可配置 可配置
结构化输出 是 是
提示词缓存 显式(由你标记前缀) 隐式(自动)
缓存有效期 5m default, 1h option 未公布
最小缓存前缀 1024 个 token 未公布

规格

Claude Sonnet 5 GLM-5.2
输入模态 文本 图像 文本
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-06-30 2026-06-16
知识截止日期 2026-01 -
上下文窗口 1M 1M
最大输出 128K 131K
思考参数
  • thinking.type "adaptive"
  • output_config.effort
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
可选值
thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max

"enabled" returns 400

thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled
reasoning_effort
  • none
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max (none and minimal skip thinking, low and medium map to high, xhigh maps to max)
默认值

thinking on (adaptive)

effort
  • high
enabled, with reasoning_effort at max: the only GLM with an effort dial, and it defaults to the top of it

规格照录自各供应商的文档;供应商没有公布的项目,对应的行直接省略,不做推断。 完整来源: Claude Sonnet 5 · GLM-5.2

同一条提示词,两个模型,经网关实测

提示词 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 检查 恰好 3 句

Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 3 sentences

Reasoning mode works by having the model generate extended internal "thinking" steps before producing its final answer, and since we're billed on total tokens, that hidden reasoning text adds significantly to what we pay for—even though you never see it in the output. This is different from simply getting longer visible responses; the model is essentially "showing its work" behind the scenes, and complex prompts can trigger thousands of extra reasoning tokens per request. The upside is improved accuracy on complex tasks, but if we want to control costs, we should selectively enable reasoning only for queries that truly need it, rather than applying it universally.

输出 194 tok 延迟 4.3 s

GLM-5.2 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning means the LLM now generates thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens to systematically work through complex problems before producing a final answer. Because our cloud providers bill for these internal processing steps at the same rate as standard output, our billable token volume per query has doubled. While this increases our direct API costs, it drastically reduces error rates and manual review labor, ultimately lowering our total cost per resolved transaction.

输出 1223 tok (+1138 思考) 延迟 17.1 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,数得出来)、受众适配(对 CFO 说话的口吻),以及下方 token 计数暴露出的隐藏思考计费差额。

提示词 This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. 检查 修复通过测试

Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 8/8 cases

## The Bug The function has two related off-by-one issues rooted in the same cause: `cur` and `best` are initialized to `0` instead of `1`, treating run lengths as the number of *matches* between adjacent elements rather than the number of *elements* in the run. This means a single-element input never enters the loop (since `range(1, 1)` is empty) and returns `0` instead of the correct answer of `1`. It also means that for any input, the run length is undercounted by exactly one — a run of 3 equal elements only produces 2 "match" increments, so `best` ends up as 2 instead of 3. The claim that it "misses runs that end at the last index" is actually a symptom of this same undercount: the logic does update `best` correctly on every iteration (including the last), but because it's counting matches instead of elements, the final reported value is always one less than the true longest run. […]

输出 536 tok 延迟 7.1 s

GLM-5.2 未通过 · 1/8 cases (fails [1])

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 […]

输出 4097 tok (+4036 思考) 延迟 58.4 s

修复是否真的正确(能运行)、解释的信息密度,以及在一个范围明确的任务上的 token 效率。

提示词 Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. 检查 合法 JSON,严格符合 schema

Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11.5, "guidance": null } ```

输出 348 tok 延迟 5.3 s

GLM-5.2 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "withheld" } ```

输出 1947 tok (+1893 思考) 延迟 30.9 s

是否严守 schema(不臆造字段)、能否顶住幻觉压力(原文明说暂不给出 guidance),以及结构化输出路径的差异。

提示词 Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. 检查 120 词,0 个禁用词

Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question

## Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching We're rolling out a new caching layer for our API gateway that works across every major LLM provider you connect through it. Instead of resending identical prompts and paying full price each time, the gateway recognizes repeated requests and serves cached responses in milliseconds—regardless of whether you're routing to OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google. What does this mean for your bill and your latency? Both drop, often significantly, especially for teams running high-volume, repetitive workloads like customer support bots or batch content generation. The cache is configurable per route, with adjustable TTLs and invalidation rules, so you stay in control of freshness versus cost. Available now for all Pro and Enterprise plans. Check your dashboard to enable it today.

输出 259 tok 延迟 4.8 s

GLM-5.2 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

We are introducing Caching for our API Gateway, the smartest way to optimize your workflows. Why pay for the exact same response twice? Now, you can automatically store and reuse prompt results across multiple AI providers, drastically reducing latency and overall operational costs. If a user submits a duplicate query, the gateway serves the cached answer instantly, regardless of whether you route to OpenAI, Anthropic, or others. This directly translates to faster applications and significantly lower monthly API bills. You can easily configure your specific caching rules within the developer dashboard and watch your efficiency soar. Stop wasting your valuable tokens on completely redundant computations. Upgrade to the latest gateway version today and experience the future of intelligent prompt management.

输出 11125 tok (+10984 思考) 延迟 114.8 s

是否守住约束(字数预算、禁用词表、只能有一个问句)、文风特征,以及长度控制。

改一行代码就能在两个模型之间切换

下方每个标签页里都有两个模型 ID,高亮的那两行是唯一要改的地方。端点不变,API key 不变,请求结构也不变。

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-sonnet-5",
    # model="glm-5.2",  # 取消注释此行,注释上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

获取 API key →

常见问题

Claude Sonnet 5 和 GLM-5.2 哪个更便宜?

按「输入 / 1M token」算,GLM-5.2 更便宜($1.4 对 $2,相差 1.4×)。其他计费项的结论可能相反,完整价格见上方表格,实际成本取决于你的用量构成。

不用分别集成两次,就能对 Claude Sonnet 5 和 GLM-5.2 做 A/B 测试吗?

可以。两个模型走同一个 OpenAI 兼容端点,用同一个 API key,切换时只要改一行里的模型名,所以可以给两个模型各分一部分流量,直接对比账单。

Claude Sonnet 5 和 GLM-5.2 支持提示词缓存吗?

支持。两个模型的缓存读取价都低于各自的输入价,所以前缀能反复命中缓存的负载,实际成本会比按官网价估算的低。具体的缓存读取价见上方价格表。

相关对比

我们的实测研究