Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not that interested in models that I can’t run on my desktop for ~0€, which is my AI budget.
Cool beans. You're not the target audience then.
GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
21–30 of 476 posts
Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#22am i missing something?
Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is GLM 5.2 Max. GLM 5.2 High which use less than half[1] the tokens. [1] https://z.ai/blog/glm-5.2
Yes, but the Artificial Analysis result is also from GLM 5.2 (max), not high.
Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#24Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#25Why aren't more people talking about this? It's literally Opus 4.7 quality stupid prices. I know providers who are offering this at unlimited tokens for $50 a month. Some are even offering API rates at 3x lower than the official ZAI api rates which are already like 10x cheaper than Opus. (Crof and Umans btw) This is a huge blow to Anthropic/OpenAI/Google and a massive win for the rest of the world. The official API p…
Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#26Why aren't more people talking about this? It's literally Opus 4.7 quality stupid prices. I know providers who are offering this at unlimited tokens for $50 a month. Some are even offering API rates at 3x lower than the official ZAI api rates which are already like 10x cheaper than Opus. (Crof and Umans btw) This is a huge blow to Anthropic/OpenAI/Google and a massive win for the rest of the world. The official API p…
Looking at openrouter [1], some of the cheaper offerings are for quantized models. Not sure how much intelligence is lost in quantization. And they are not 3 times cheaper. Where did you find 3x lower prices for APIs? I am considering skipping open router and using them directly for that price.
edit:
I see, croft [2] 8bit for $0.50/$0.08/$2.20
Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#27I've been playing with this model a fair amount over the last 24 hours, and I can confirm it's quite capable, while being a little bit verbose (I've seen it reconsider things 3-4 times in thinking traces before deciding on a path forward), and not being quite as good as GPT5.5 at working through complex abstract requirements. Honestly it's good enough that I feel comfortable recommending a Z.AI sub + a $20/mo OpenAI…
Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#28Why aren't more people talking about this? It's literally Opus 4.7 quality stupid prices. I know providers who are offering this at unlimited tokens for $50 a month. Some are even offering API rates at 3x lower than the official ZAI api rates which are already like 10x cheaper than Opus. (Crof and Umans btw) This is a huge blow to Anthropic/OpenAI/Google and a massive win for the rest of the world. The official API p…
Be careful about unofficial providers, a lot of them misconfigure models or stealth quantize them. For a while the difference between Kimi on the official API and most third party providers was 20-40%.
Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#29It seems to really be a nice step-up and is getting quite close to the frontier. I wish they'd start focusing on the reasoning efficiency now, though. I have a simple (relatively) test task to evaluate LLMs: writing a simple math evaluator library in Nim (it's about 400-600 lines total max), and GLM 5.2 (xhigh which maps to max effort) spent over 15 minutes (!) reasoning, spending about 45k tokens, before it finally…
To point where I stop it and simple tell it to “start writing code you can work it out as you go along”
Seems writers block also effects LLM
Re: GLM-5.2 is the new leading open weights model on Artificial Analysis
#30It seems to really be a nice step-up and is getting quite close to the frontier. I wish they'd start focusing on the reasoning efficiency now, though. I have a simple (relatively) test task to evaluate LLMs: writing a simple math evaluator library in Nim (it's about 400-600 lines total max), and GLM 5.2 (xhigh which maps to max effort) spent over 15 minutes (!) reasoning, spending about 45k tokens, before it finally…