Compare / head-to-head

GLM-5.2vsHy3

GLM-5.2 leads 7 of 7 shared benchmarks. Hy3 is 8.8x cheaper per token. GLM-5.2 has the larger context window (1M tokens).

Benchmarks from cited public sources; pricing from official pages; status from official provider feeds.

Shared benchmarks
7 – 0
GLM-5.2 leads
Cheaper per token
Hy3
8.8x cheaper, input + output
Larger context
GLM-5.2
1M tokens
Providers
2 providers
Z.ai · Tencent Hunyuan
GLM-5.2
Z.ai · released 2026-06-24
text
Context
1M
Max out
131K
Input /1M
$1.4 ↗
Output /1M
$4.4 ↗
Cached /1M
$0.26
Scores
53 · 12 core
Hy3
Tencent Hunyuan · released 2026-07-06
text
Context
256K
Max out
—
Input /1M
$0.132 ↗
Output /1M
$0.528 ↗
Cached /1M
$0.033
Scores
45 · 10 core
Quality

Benchmark matrix

BenchmarkGLM-5.2Hy3ΔEdge
Reported by both · 7
GPQA Diamond91.9% ↗epoch run90.4% ↗+1.5 ptGLM-5.2
LMArena Elo1475.8 ↗1440.6 ↗+35.2GLM-5.2
LMArena Agent (LMArena)0.0348 ↗-0.0538 ↗+0.1GLM-5.2
LMArena WebDev (LMArena)1605 ↗1507.4 ↗+97.6GLM-5.2
NL2Repo48.9% ↗45.6% ↗+3.3 ptGLM-5.2
Terminal-Bench 2.181% ↗71.7% ↗+9.3 ptGLM-5.2
Toolathlon-Verified (HKUST)59.9% ↗56.8% ↗+3.1 ptGLM-5.2
Only GLM-5.2 reports · 39
AIME 202690% ↗matharena ⚠not reported——
Agents' Last Exam (ALE-CLI)23.8% ↗not reported——
APEX-Agents (Mercor)45.2% ↗not reported——
AutomationBench v1.0.626.2% ↗not reported——
Chess Puzzles (Epoch AI run)21% ↗epoch runnot reported——
CyberGym77.2% ↗not reported——
DeepSWE v1.146.2% ↗not reported——
DeepSWE v1.1 (Datacurve)43.8% ↗not reported——
EBR-bench (Epoch AI run)9.5% ↗epoch runnot reported——
ExploitBench24.4% ↗not reported——
ExploitGym 2h29 ↗not reported——
ExploitGym 6h39 ↗not reported——
FrontierMath Tier 4 v2 (Epoch AI run)29.3% ↗epoch runnot reported——
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (Epoch AI run)59.2% ↗epoch runnot reported——
FrontierSWE67.5% ↗not reported——
GDPval-AA v21508 ↗not reported——
HLE (with tools)54.7% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Agentic Coding (LiveBench)51.8% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Coding (LiveBench)79.7% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Data Analysis (LiveBench)73.7% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Instruction Following (LiveBench)62.3% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Language (LiveBench)76.2% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Mathematics (LiveBench)89.8% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Reasoning (LiveBench)78.6% ↗not reported——
Mystery Game Puzzles (Epoch AI run)19% ↗epoch runnot reported——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 (Epoch AI run)86.4% ↗epoch runnot reported——
PostTrainBench31.7% ↗not reported——
ProgramBench (Almost Solved)9.5% ↗not reported——
SimpleBench (SimpleBench)58.8% ↗not reported——
SimpleQA Verified34.2% ↗epoch runnot reported——
SWE-Bench Pro62.1% ↗not reported——
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch AI run)78.7% ↗epoch runnot reported——
SWE-Marathon v1.119.4% ↗not reported——
SWE-rebench 2026-05-15 to 2026-07-01 (Nebius)62.9% ↗not reported——
tau2-bench Banking Knowledge (Sierra)37.1% ↗not reported——
Terminal-Bench 3.04.6% ↗not reported——
Toolathlon Verified59.9% ↗not reported——
Vending-Bench 2 (Andon Labs)8313.78 ↗not reported——
WeirdML (Håvard Tveit Ihle)70.1% ↗not reported——
Only Hy3 reports · 37
SWE-bench Verifiednot reported78% ↗——
Humanity's Last Exam (no tools)not reported37% ↗——
AA-LCRnot reported73.4% ↗——
Apex-Agentnot reported25.6% ↗——
ArxivMathnot reported52.2% ↗——
BrowseCompnot reported84.2% ↗——
CL-benchnot reported23.8% ↗——
CL-bench Lifenot reported17% ↗——
ClawEvalnot reported68.5% ↗——
CMT-Benchmarknot reported37.8% ↗——
DeepSearchQAnot reported91% ↗——
DeepSWEnot reported28% ↗——
e-benchnot reported50.2% ↗——
FrontierScience-Olympiadnot reported74.8% ↗——
FrontierScience-Researchnot reported21.3% ↗——
HLE (with tools, text-only)not reported53.2% ↗——
HorizonMathnot reported7.1% ↗——
Hy-Backend 2.0not reported25% ↗——
Hy-CompanyBenchnot reported41.7% ↗——
Hy-Euler Pronot reported24.2% ↗——
Hy-FinModelBenchnot reported69% ↗——
Hy-Mathnot reported60.9% ↗——
Hy-SkillsWorldnot reported45.8% ↗——
Hy-SWE Maxnot reported49% ↗——
IMOAnswerBenchnot reported90% ↗——
MathArena Apexnot reported38.7% ↗——
MCP Atlasnot reported79.1% ↗——
PHYBenchnot reported77.4% ↗——
ProdBenchnot reported23% ↗——
SkillsBenchnot reported55.3% ↗——
SuperChemnot reported54.9% ↗——
SWE-bench Multilingualnot reported75.8% ↗——
SWE-bench Pronot reported57.9% ↗——
Toolathlonnot reported48.5% ↗——
USAMO 2026not reported72% ↗——
WideSearchnot reported76.4% ↗——
WildClawBenchnot reported53.6% ↗——
Scores tagged "epoch" or "matharena" are independent runs, used only where the lab has not published its own; ⚠ marks rows MathArena flags as released after the competition. Higher is better on every row. Δ is GLM-5.2 minus Hy3 in the benchmark's own unit. "Not reported" means the lab has not published that figure; it is not a zero. ↗ opens the source.
Specs & pricing

Side by side

SpecGLM-5.2Hy3Edge
Context window1M tokens256K tokensGLM-5.2
Max output131K tokens——
Input price / 1M$1.4 ↗$0.132 ↗Hy3
Output price / 1M$4.4 ↗$0.528 ↗Hy3
Cached input / 1M$0.26 ↗$0.033 ↗Hy3
Input + output / 1M
Lower is cheaper. List prices; batch, tool and regional fees excluded.
$5.8$0.66Hy3
ModalitiestexttextTie
Released2026-06-242026-07-06—
Cited benchmark scores5345—
Reliability

Provider status

All providers →
Built by Respan
Which one wins on your data?

Public benchmarks are a starting point. Run GLM-5.2 and Hy3 on your own prompts with Respan evals, or route to either through one gateway key with automatic failover.