新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,免绑卡。

GLM-5 vs GLM-5.2

vs

何时用哪一个

这两个 Z.ai 模型在模态(文本进、文本出)、能力标志(聊天、代码、推理、工具、长上下文)、131072 最大输出 token 和可选思考上完全一致。区别有两处。上下文:2026-06-16 发布的 glm-5.2 支持 1000000 token,是 2026-02-12 的 glm-5 的 200000 的五倍,并新增了推理力度调节。价目表:glm-5 在两条 token 线上都低约 1.4 倍,输入 $1 对 $1.4,输出 $3.2 对 $4.4,缓存读取低 1.3 倍,$0.2 对 $0.26。整库或大语料提示选 glm-5.2;任务能装进 200000 token 且在意价格时留在 glm-5。

Benchmark 成绩

领先高于同侪均值无人分数更高GLM-5115 / 522 / 52GLM-5.21626 / 701 / 70

双方都被测过的 17 项。

GLM-5 GLM-5.2 其他被测模型 同侪均值 无人分数更高
SWE-Bench Pro
55.1%
62.1%
Cybergym
43.2%
N/A
GDPval-AA v2 Elo · 642-1861
N/A
1510
Harvey Lab-AA
N/A
91%
GPQA Diamond
86%
91.2%
MCP-Atlas
69.8%
82.6%

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

定价

GLM-5 GLM-5.2 Δ
输入 / 1M tokens $1 $1.4 0.71×
输出 / 1M tokens $3.2 $4.4 0.73×
缓存读取 / 1M tokens $0.2 $0.26 0.77×

费率取自构建时的实时目录;每个模型页面均附有当前的费率卡。

它们的位置 — 以该计费单位计费的所有 64 个 聊天 模型的 每 1M token 的输入价格(对数刻度)

GLM-5 · $1 GLM-5.2 · $1.4
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

GLM-5 GLM-5.2
工具使用
思考控制 可配置 可配置
结构化输出
提示词缓存 隐式(自动) 隐式(自动)
缓存生存时间 未公开 未公开
最小缓存前缀 未公开 未公开

规格

GLM-5 GLM-5.2
输入模态 文本 文本
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-02-12 2026-06-16
上下文窗口 200K 1M
最大输出 131K 131K
思考参数 thinking.type
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
允许的值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled
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, and on GLM-5 the model automatically determines whether to think enabled, with reasoning_effort at max: the only GLM with an effort dial, and it defaults to the top of it

规格转录自各供应商的文档;若供应商未发布某项数据,则直接省略该行,而非进行推断。 完整来源: GLM-5 · GLM-5.2

单个 Prompt,两个模型 —— 通过网关实测

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 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning forces the model to perform multiple hidden steps to "think" through a problem, drastically increasing the volume of data processed per query compared to a standard response. Because our billing is directly tied to this processing volume, the additional computational work required for higher accuracy has proportionally doubled our consumption. Essentially, the spike reflects a trade-off where we are paying a higher variable cost to secure significantly better analytical outcomes.

输出 1393 tok (+1308 思考) 延迟 36.0 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,可数)、受众适配(面向 CFO 的语气),以及下方 token 计量所暴露的隐藏思考计费缺口。

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 通过 · 8/8 cases

Here is the fixed code: ```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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` **Explanation:** The bug stems from initializing `best` and `cur` to zero, which causes the function to count the number of *transitions* between adjacent elements rather than the total number of items in the run, resulting in a return value that is always one less than the actual length (reporting 0 for a single element and 1 for a pair). By initializing the counters to 1 and resetting `cur` to 1 when a streak breaks, the logic correctly counts the items themselves; adding an explicit check for an empty list ensures the function handles the zero-element edge case correctly.

输出 2907 tok (+2694 思考) 延迟 73.7 s

GLM-5.2 未命中 · 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(可运行)、解释的信息密度,以及在一个边界明确的任务上的 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,schema 精确

GLM-5 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "withheld pending the Q4 close" } ```

输出 3620 tok (+3561 思考) 延迟 91.8 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

schema 服从度(不臆造字段)、幻觉压力(guidance 明确被暂缓给出),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 通过 · 119 words, 0 banned, 1 question

We are thrilled to introduce Global Prompt Caching, a powerful new capability within our API gateway designed to optimize your AI operations. By intelligently storing prompt responses across every supported provider, this feature drastically reduces latency and cuts operational costs. Instead of processing identical requests repeatedly, our system serves cached results instantly, ensuring consistent performance even during high-traffic periods. Why pay full price for repeated inference on the same inputs? This update gives developers fine-grained control over cache lifetimes and hit rates, allowing for predictable budgeting and faster application response times. You can activate this functionality directly in your dashboard settings today. Start maximizing your efficiency now and deliver a snappier experience to your end-users without unnecessary API expenditure.

输出 715 tok (+571 思考) 延迟 18.9 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

约束服从度(字数预算、禁用词表、唯一的那句问句)、文风指纹,以及长度控制。

只需一行代码即可在它们之间切换

两个 ID 都包含在下方的每个选项卡中 — 高亮显示的两行是唯一的修改。相同的端点,相同的密钥,相同的请求结构。

from openai import OpenAI

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

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="glm-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 密钥 →

常见问题

GLM-5 和 GLM-5.2 哪个更便宜?

在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面,GLM-5 更便宜($1 对比 $1.4,相差 1.4×)。其他行可能得出相反的结论——上方表格提供了完整信息,实际成本取决于你的组合使用情况。

我可以在不进行两次集成的情况下,对 GLM-5 和 GLM-5.2 进行 A/B 测试吗?

可以。两者均通过同一个兼容 OpenAI 的端点提供服务,并使用同一把 API 密钥——切换只需更改一行模型字符串,因此你可以将一部分流量路由到各个模型并直接比较账单。

GLM-5 和 GLM-5.2 支持提示词缓存吗?

是的 —— 两者对缓存读取的计费均低于其输入费率,因此热前缀工作负载的成本低于标价。准确的缓存读取行位于上方的定价表中。

相关对比

来自我们的实测研究