Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

We ran a test comparing GLM 5.2 vs Sonnet 5. We used the same prompt, with /design in the command code. The difference is big - effects, motion, and especially the footer. Sonnet 5 had nice hover effects, but didn't come close to GLM 5.2 GLM 5.2 wins on... show more

Command Code

11,149 subscribers

44,260 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Education News & Politics Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Grok 4.5 operates at Opus-level intelligence and Sonnet-level pricing! We tested it against Claude Opus 4.8, Sonnet 5, and GLM 5.2 on a SpaceX mission: liftoff, stage sep, orbit insertion, satellite deploy. Grok 4.5 animates it more accurately and vividly than Sonnet 5 and GLM 5.2. Opus is the fastest and most expensive. Grok burns more tokens but still lands ~40% cheaper than Opus, and a bit under Sonnet 5. Time / tokens / cost: Grok 4.5 — / 35k / $0.69 Opus 4.8 — / 13.7k / $1.10 Sonnet 5 — / 22.1k / $0.78 GLM 5.2 — / 92.7k / $0.13 yet GLM did the whole mission for $0.13 😮

Grok 4.5 operates at Opus-level intelligence and Sonnet-level pricing! We tested it against Claude Opus 4.8, Sonnet 5, and GLM 5.2 on a SpaceX mission: liftoff, stage sep, orbit insertion, satellite deploy. Grok 4.5 animates it more accurately and vividly than Sonnet 5 and GLM 5.2. Opus is the fastest and most expensive. Grok burns more tokens but still lands ~40% cheaper than Opus, and a bit under Sonnet 5. Time / tokens / cost: Grok 4.5 — / 35k / $0.69 Opus 4.8 — / 13.7k / $1.10 Sonnet 5 — / 22.1k / $0.78 GLM 5.2 — / 92.7k / $0.13 yet GLM did the whole mission for $0.13 😮

GMI Cloud

150,809 views • 1 month ago

we asked GLM 5.2 and Claude Opus 4.8 to find and fix the bugs in two different scripts while Opus 4.8 finished a few seconds faster in both tests, GLM 5.2 burned roughly 17k–38k fewer tokens and absolutely crushed it on cost, coming in 15x to 22x cheaper! Test 1: GLM 5.2 ($0.068) vs. Opus 4.8 ($1.06) Test 2: GLM 5.2 ($0.045) vs. Opus 4.8 ($1.02)

we asked GLM 5.2 and Claude Opus 4.8 to find and fix the bugs in two different scripts while Opus 4.8 finished a few seconds faster in both tests, GLM 5.2 burned roughly 17k–38k fewer tokens and absolutely crushed it on cost, coming in 15x to 22x cheaper! Test 1: GLM 5.2 ($0.068) vs. Opus 4.8 ($1.06) Test 2: GLM 5.2 ($0.045) vs. Opus 4.8 ($1.02)

GMI Cloud

86,671 views • 2 months ago

1-bit GLM-5.2 GGUF vs. Claude 4.8 Opus vs. GPT-5.5 We gave 3 models the same prompt and compared one-shot outputs. The 1-bit GLM-5.2 GGUF ran locally on a Mac Studio M3 Ultra with 256GB RAM at ~21.6 tok/s. Which output do you like best? GGUF:

1-bit GLM-5.2 GGUF vs. Claude 4.8 Opus vs. GPT-5.5 We gave 3 models the same prompt and compared one-shot outputs. The 1-bit GLM-5.2 GGUF ran locally on a Mac Studio M3 Ultra with 256GB RAM at ~21.6 tok/s. Which output do you like best? GGUF:

Unsloth AI

1,543,147 views • 2 months ago

I re-ran my Fable 5 3D dashboard demo with GLM-5.2. Same prompt. Same reference image. The result is actually pretty solid: 3D globe, route arcs, glass panels, stats cards, and a usable demo page. It is not at Fable 5 level yet, especially in visual precision and one-shot polish. But GLM-5.2 is accessible to all GLM Coding Plan users now. If you’re curious, it’s worth trying. Demo webpage + prompt below 👇

I re-ran my Fable 5 3D dashboard demo with GLM-5.2. Same prompt. Same reference image. The result is actually pretty solid: 3D globe, route arcs, glass panels, stats cards, and a usable demo page. It is not at Fable 5 level yet, especially in visual precision and one-shot polish. But GLM-5.2 is accessible to all GLM Coding Plan users now. If you’re curious, it’s worth trying. Demo webpage + prompt below 👇

AI Builder Club

49,848 views • 2 months ago

Ran two prompts in Kimi K2.7 Code HighSpeed, Kimi K2.7 Code, and GLM 5.2 HighSpeed is 2.5 to 4.2 times faster than Kimi K2.7 Code while producing comparable quality 4.5 to 15 times faster than GLM 5.2, and half the price (or less) These are simple tests, so the pricing difference is small and speed difference could diverge a lot But definitely a hell of a lot faster with good output

Ran two prompts in Kimi K2.7 Code HighSpeed, Kimi K2.7 Code, and GLM 5.2 HighSpeed is 2.5 to 4.2 times faster than Kimi K2.7 Code while producing comparable quality 4.5 to 15 times faster than GLM 5.2, and half the price (or less) These are simple tests, so the pricing difference is small and speed difference could diverge a lot But definitely a hell of a lot faster with good output

GMI Cloud

38,174 views • 2 months ago

I was skeptical about giving GLM-5.2 the task to build a super mario snes style game in a single HTML file so i ran the test on Opus and also on GLM-5.2 Opus didnt even try to make a game or made something but it wasn't a game GLM-5.2 one shotted a pretty functional game.. WILD

I was skeptical about giving GLM-5.2 the task to build a super mario snes style game in a single HTML file so i ran the test on Opus and also on GLM-5.2 Opus didnt even try to make a game or made something but it wasn't a game GLM-5.2 one shotted a pretty functional game.. WILD

Hermes Agent Tips

32,883 views • 2 months ago

GLM 5.2 vs Kimi K2.7 both were tested on same settings with same prompt > GLM one shotted everything in 35 mins > Kimi needed extra prompts to fix movements and took 30 mins super surpised by how good GLM 5.2 is, while being so cheap which one do you think won?

GLM 5.2 vs Kimi K2.7 both were tested on same settings with same prompt > GLM one shotted everything in 35 mins > Kimi needed extra prompts to fix movements and took 30 mins super surpised by how good GLM 5.2 is, while being so cheap which one do you think won?

J A Z I I

63,741 views • 2 months ago

GLM 5.3 Max vs Fable 5 vs Qwen 3.8 Max vs Grok 4.6 GLM 5.3 is a massive jump over 5.2. Still not beating Fable 5 for me, but it’s way closer now. And vs Grok 4.6? I’d take GLM 5.3 pretty easily on this test.

GLM 5.3 Max vs Fable 5 vs Qwen 3.8 Max vs Grok 4.6 GLM 5.3 is a massive jump over 5.2. Still not beating Fable 5 for me, but it’s way closer now. And vs Grok 4.6? I’d take GLM 5.3 pretty easily on this test.

OmedTheVibeCoder

16,648 views • 18 days ago

GLM-5.2 is legit. It produces games easily and as accurately as SOTA closed-source models. My GLM 5.2 versus Fable 5 comparison is close, but I prefer Fable 5 just a little. Both games are equal in nearly all respects, but Fable 5 produced slightly better graphics and more challenging gameplay. Both needed 2 shots to get all the prompt instructions correct.

GLM-5.2 is legit. It produces games easily and as accurately as SOTA closed-source models. My GLM 5.2 versus Fable 5 comparison is close, but I prefer Fable 5 just a little. Both games are equal in nearly all respects, but Fable 5 produced slightly better graphics and more challenging gameplay. Both needed 2 shots to get all the prompt instructions correct.

David Hendrickson

18,785 views • 2 months ago

We ran GLM 5.2 and Kimi K3 on 100 deep research tasks (DRACO by perplexity) and asked Fable to be the judge Kimi K3: 71.6 mean score, 77% pass rate GLM 5.2: 41.5 mean score, 22% pass rate K3 took 3h 38m and $60. GLM finished in 1h 45m for $12.50. Deep Dive in 🧵

We ran GLM 5.2 and Kimi K3 on 100 deep research tasks (DRACO by perplexity) and asked Fable to be the judge Kimi K3: 71.6 mean score, 77% pass rate GLM 5.2: 41.5 mean score, 22% pass rate K3 took 3h 38m and $60. GLM finished in 1h 45m for $12.50. Deep Dive in 🧵

GMI Cloud

111,507 views • 1 month ago

Opus 4.8 vs GLM 5.2 everyone is praising Glm on my timeline, so i had to test it myself > both models were given the same prompt > GLM was super fast and used like 2% of my weekly limit > Opus took over 20 mins and used like 3% of weekly limits which one do you think won?

Opus 4.8 vs GLM 5.2 everyone is praising Glm on my timeline, so i had to test it myself > both models were given the same prompt > GLM was super fast and used like 2% of my weekly limit > Opus took over 20 mins and used like 3% of weekly limits which one do you think won?

J A Z I I

48,124 views • 2 months ago

Who did it best? GLM-5.2 (left) | Fugu Ultra (middle) | Fable 5 (right) Same one-shot prompt. The last one is my favorite!

Who did it best? GLM-5.2 (left) | Fugu Ultra (middle) | Fable 5 (right) Same one-shot prompt. The last one is my favorite!

elvis

47,223 views • 2 months ago

I gave the exact same prompt to Qwen 3.7 Max and GLM 5.2. Same workflow. Same platform. Nearly the same starting price. The results weren't even close. Here's what happened. 👇

I gave the exact same prompt to Qwen 3.7 Max and GLM 5.2. Same workflow. Same platform. Nearly the same starting price. The results weren't even close. Here's what happened. 👇

Md Riyazuddin

153,121 views • 1 month ago

GLM 5.2 just beat Fable 5 at website design. 🌐 The crazy part: GLM is text-only. It can build the site, but it can’t inspect the result. So we paired it with Browser Use v2 multimodal QA subagents. > Reviews the site and finds bugs > Judges the aesthetics > Sends GLM targeted fixes to iterate on Build + full QA cost less than $0.75. Try it now ↓

GLM 5.2 just beat Fable 5 at website design. 🌐 The crazy part: GLM is text-only. It can build the site, but it can’t inspect the result. So we paired it with Browser Use v2 multimodal QA subagents. > Reviews the site and finds bugs > Judges the aesthetics > Sends GLM targeted fixes to iterate on Build + full QA cost less than $0.75. Try it now ↓

Browser Use

273,764 views • 2 months ago

I love using GLM 5.2 for web app iteration. My workflow: generate 6 variations, then pick the best one and continue iterating on it. I built Recast to make this even easier. Give it a prompt, get 6 variations, download the code for your favorite version, then continue iterating in your own coding agent. GLM 5.2 works really well for this use case since it's fast, cheap, and great at design. On average, you can make 3-6 landing pages with GLM 5.2 for every one you can generate with Opus 4.8. And the design variety of the GLM landing pages helps a lot with trying to think through what style you want to go with. Recast is launching soon (as a web app + skill).

I love using GLM 5.2 for web app iteration. My workflow: generate 6 variations, then pick the best one and continue iterating on it. I built Recast to make this even easier. Give it a prompt, get 6 variations, download the code for your favorite version, then continue iterating in your own coding agent. GLM 5.2 works really well for this use case since it's fast, cheap, and great at design. On average, you can make 3-6 landing pages with GLM 5.2 for every one you can generate with Opus 4.8. And the design variety of the GLM landing pages helps a lot with trying to think through what style you want to go with. Recast is launching soon (as a web app + skill).

Hassan

20,164 views • 2 months ago

MiniMax M3 vs GLM-5.2 vs Kimi K2.7 in Lunar Lander contest! 🔥 Last test of the day before going back to learning & build phase with Local Models, Swift and Apple Core AI 💪 I took the opportunity to test the MiniMax Code app for macOS. Video below speeded up. Followed by Lunar Lander implementation from the various models. My ranking: 🥇 GLM 5.2 🥈 MiniMax M3 🥉 Kimi K2.7 Coding Prompt and final results in this gist:

MiniMax M3 vs GLM-5.2 vs Kimi K2.7 in Lunar Lander contest! 🔥 Last test of the day before going back to learning & build phase with Local Models, Swift and Apple Core AI 💪 I took the opportunity to test the MiniMax Code app for macOS. Video below speeded up. Followed by Lunar Lander implementation from the various models. My ranking: 🥇 GLM 5.2 🥈 MiniMax M3 🥉 Kimi K2.7 Coding Prompt and final results in this gist:

Ivan Fioravanti ᯅ

21,604 views • 2 months ago

GLM 5.2 by Z.ai is even bigger than the DeepSeek moment. In the past few months, open source AI had been quite stagnant. New releases were underwhelming and still far behind the top closed models. But GLM 5.2 is different. It gets surprisingly close to GPT and Opus-level quality, while being much cheaper and open-weight. It just gets things done with very minimal hand holding. Full review

GLM 5.2 by Z.ai is even bigger than the DeepSeek moment. In the past few months, open source AI had been quite stagnant. New releases were underwhelming and still far behind the top closed models. But GLM 5.2 is different. It gets surprisingly close to GPT and Opus-level quality, while being much cheaper and open-weight. It just gets things done with very minimal hand holding. Full review

⚡AI Search⚡

36,471 views • 2 months ago

I couldn't believe the results of this benchmarking test. I blind-tested 6 frontier models — Sonnet 5, Opus 4.8, Fable 5, GPT 5.5, GLM 5.2, and Kimi 2.5 — on knowledge work, not engineering. Writing. Analysis. Design. Vibe coding. Subagent simulations. The stuff we actually do all day. Same prompts, each model running its own subagent, every output graded blind before the labels were revealed. The results: → GLM 5.2 (the dirt-cheap open-source model from China) took first → Sonnet 5 took second, beating Fable 5 for knowledge work → Opus 4.8 got whooped Then I had Composer 2.5 judge every output independently — and it picked Fable 5 almost across the board. My blind picks and the AI judge completely disagreed. Full breakdown, method, and prompts in the video below. Which model are you running as your daily driver right now?

I couldn't believe the results of this benchmarking test. I blind-tested 6 frontier models — Sonnet 5, Opus 4.8, Fable 5, GPT 5.5, GLM 5.2, and Kimi 2.5 — on knowledge work, not engineering. Writing. Analysis. Design. Vibe coding. Subagent simulations. The stuff we actually do all day. Same prompts, each model running its own subagent, every output graded blind before the labels were revealed. The results: → GLM 5.2 (the dirt-cheap open-source model from China) took first → Sonnet 5 took second, beating Fable 5 for knowledge work → Opus 4.8 got whooped Then I had Composer 2.5 judge every output independently — and it picked Fable 5 almost across the board. My blind picks and the AI judge completely disagreed. Full breakdown, method, and prompts in the video below. Which model are you running as your daily driver right now?

JJ Englert

10,737 views • 2 months ago

New Z.ai GLM-5.2 beats Kimi K2.7 Code on physics contest! We gave both models the same three prompts and asked them to build self contained HTML5 sims with real physics and no libraries: 1. Pool break 2. Block on a bed of springs 3. Galton board Outputs: GLM-5.2: 12,640 tokens Kimi K2.7 Code: 7,420 tokens GLM 5.2 nailed all three, and it did it with way more detail and polish. The break conserved momentum, the block bounced off the springs and the Galton beads spread into a clean bell curve. Kimi struggled on every scene: its block fell straight through the springs, its break didn't look realistic with the balls colliding all wrong, and on the Galton board its balls overlapped and piled into each other instead of spreading out

New Z.ai GLM-5.2 beats Kimi K2.7 Code on physics contest! We gave both models the same three prompts and asked them to build self contained HTML5 sims with real physics and no libraries: 1. Pool break 2. Block on a bed of springs 3. Galton board Outputs: GLM-5.2: 12,640 tokens Kimi K2.7 Code: 7,420 tokens GLM 5.2 nailed all three, and it did it with way more detail and polish. The break conserved momentum, the block bounced off the springs and the Galton beads spread into a clean bell curve. Kimi struggled on every scene: its block fell straight through the springs, its break didn't look realistic with the balls colliding all wrong, and on the Galton board its balls overlapped and piled into each other instead of spreading out

atomic.chat

60,899 views • 2 months ago

you can now get unlimited free GLM 5.2 for the first time in history 😳 this is bigger than ever. here's how to do it: 1 / cancel your existing subscriptions: cancel your Lovable, Cursor, and Claude Code subscriptions. you don't need them anymore 2 / sign up for an account on freebuff you can now use unlimited GPT 5.6 and deepseek as well. 3 / to get GLM 5.2: go to the earn tab, and complete the bounties. a bounty provides unlimited GLM 5.2 messages for an hour, each. this isn't going to last forever.

you can now get unlimited free GLM 5.2 for the first time in history 😳 this is bigger than ever. here's how to do it: 1 / cancel your existing subscriptions: cancel your Lovable, Cursor, and Claude Code subscriptions. you don't need them anymore 2 / sign up for an account on freebuff you can now use unlimited GPT 5.6 and deepseek as well. 3 / to get GLM 5.2: go to the earn tab, and complete the bounties. a bounty provides unlimited GLM 5.2 messages for an hour, each. this isn't going to last forever.

Victor Cheng

52,303 views • 21 days ago