GLM 5.2 vs. Opus

not apples to apples. comparing official vs. pi.dev+openrouter and having slow times is more a openrouter issue. try comparing using official z.ai.

Would have run it with GLM on max/xhigh effort. Just for fun.

glm-5.2 is very good if you have a good harness and workflow to use it with. in fact, i'd call it good enough if you are a software engineer who knows what you want. it writes the code. i'm wondering if i need anthropic's models at all at this point, or openai. and surely in a year we won't need them at all. Opus 4.5+ was the turning point for me, and now these open models are just as good. i don't get how you IPO these companies when their only winning product is coding agents and the competition is just as good for 1/4 the price.

Just that their Coding Plan is too hard to get. I've been trying to grab it for a week and still can't get it

The model is 756B parameters, open weights.

While this is interesting, one single sample with different coding harness is not very scientific.

The text only part is the catch for me.

If it builds a UI and can't look at it, it's askin ls whether the app looks right.

i think GLM 5.2 is not cheap and not easy to get the coding plan... so even it's on the Opus level... still not attractive.

I'm really feeling a bit tired of these models. I feel that since opus 4.1, I haven't been able to clearly feel the intelligence improvement from the model upgrades (except for gpt 5.5 and opus4.6 being able to speak like a human)

If you are a real engineer and uses the LLM as a pair programmer instead of delegating everything to it, even GLM 4.7 was already good enough to help you with a lot of work.

I used it with Cerebras inference at a time when it had a good coding plan at a low price, and delivered tons of stuff using it.

For those praising GLM 5.2, can anyone confirm?

Tried with 2 harnesses and it seems bad + slow

GLM is the most overrated LLM. I tried it and it not good.

GLM cannot use vision like Opus can. This is not a useful comparison.

What is this fashion of testing models by giving them one shot projects? Especially games. this is so stupid

Seeing the results I don't see how the results are even comparable Opus is clearly far superior in most aspects. Smoothness, design, functionality etc.

At the end of the day, the time earned is more important then the cost for big players.

The ability to spawn 10 claude agents and rush a project to outcompete someone is more important for big businesses in my imo. Also the small details that GLM missed would take significant more time to iron out, considering it already took double the time.

I do hope other (open weight) models catch up, but to act like they are anywhere close for me is a bit disingenuous.

I swear, if I read forms with “genuinely” one more time I am gonna scream. FUCK LLM WRITING

[flagged]

[dead]

[dead]

Chinese models optimize for benchmarks and do poorly in real-world tasks