新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,无需绑卡。

GLM-5.2 vs Qwen3.8 Max

vs

什么时候选哪个

两者都是文本输出的长上下文推理模型,最大输出 131072 token,所以真正的分野是模态和价格:glm-5.2 只接受文本,$1.4 输入、$4.4 输出;qwen3.8-max 还接受图像,$2 输入、$6 输出,两项都贵约 1.4 倍,缓存读取 $0.25 对 $0.26 基本持平。流水线要喂截图、图表或扫描页时选 qwen3.8-max;纯文本的聊天、代码和工具工作选 glm-5.2,它每 token 更便宜,窗口略大为 1000000 token,并可关闭思考。

Benchmark 成绩

领先高于同类均值无更高分GLM-5.2225 / 801 / 80Qwen3.8 Max1731 / 408 / 40

19 项两边都有成绩。

GLM-5.2 Qwen3.8 Max 其他参测模型 同类均值 ★ 没有模型得分更高
SWE-Bench Pro
62.1%
67.7%
AndroidBench
N/A
75.1%
Cybergym
77.2%
78.5%
HealthBench
N/A
没有模型得分更高 60.2%
JobBench
43.4%
53.4%
Harvey Lab-AA
91%
N/A
GPQA Diamond
91.2%
92.6%
Agents' Last Exam
23.8%
27%

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

价格

GLM-5.2 Qwen3.8 Max Δ
输入 / 1M token $1.4 $2 0.7×
输出 / 1M token $4.4 $6 0.73×
缓存读取 / 1M token $0.26 $0.25 1×
缓存写入 - 1.25x -

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)

GLM-5.2 · $1.4 Qwen3.8 Max · $2
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

GLM-5.2 Qwen3.8 Max
工具调用 是 是
思考控制 可配置 是,但供应商未公布调节参数
结构化输出 是 是
提示词缓存 隐式(自动) 隐式 + 显式
缓存有效期 未公布 explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小缓存前缀 未公布 1024 个 token

规格

GLM-5.2 Qwen3.8 Max
输入模态 文本 文本 图像
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-06-16 2026-08-03
上下文窗口 1M 984K
最大输出 131K 131K
思考参数
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
-
可选值
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 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: GLM-5.2 · Qwen3.8 Max

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

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

Qwen3.8 Max 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model produce additional hidden steps before responding, and those tokens are billable. It also tends to lengthen each interaction because the model works through more possibilities before settling on an answer. Therefore, the bill doubled mainly due to higher compute and token usage per request, not necessarily because the number of requests doubled.

输出 378 tok (+305 思考) 延迟 8.6 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

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

Qwen3.8 Max 通过 · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that the original code starts `best` and `cur` at `0`, so it counts adjacent equal *transitions* rather than the number of items in the run. A run of length `n` has only `n - 1` equal-neighbor transitions, so single-element inputs return `0`, and runs that reach the end are undercounted by one. Initializing the current run to `1` for the first element, resetting it to `1` on a break, and updating `best` from that count fixes the off-by-one.

输出 1616 tok (+1411 思考) 延迟 34.7 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

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

Qwen3.8 Max 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }

输出 1199 tok (+1141 思考) 延迟 24.4 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

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

Qwen3.8 Max 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today, our API gateway adds prompt caching across major model providers. It stores prompts and responses in one fast cache layer. Teams can lower token spend, reduce latency, and repeat reliable answers. The feature supports OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Mistral through one configuration. You can set retention rules, scope access, and invalidate entries quickly. How does your team maintain consistent results during provider outages? Approved cached responses keep applications stable while fallback routes recover. The dashboard shows hit rates, savings, latency, and provider usage. Engineers receive audit trails for every cached prompt, enabling safer testing. Product managers can compare cost trends before and after cache adoption. Start with a small route, then safely expand caching to production traffic right now.

输出 2744 tok (+2591 思考) 延迟 46.3 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="glm-5.2",
    # model="qwen3.8-max",  # 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

GLM-5.2 和 Qwen3.8 Max 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 GLM-5.2 和 Qwen3.8 Max 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。

GLM-5.2 和 Qwen3.8 Max 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