Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) vs GLM-5.2 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) by Anthropic or GLM-5.2 (Max) by Z AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GLM-5.2 (Max) scores 4.2 points higher (33.7 vs 29.5) but costs 61× as much to run the benchmark ($2097 vs $34.3; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.2 (Max) when you need intelligence above 29.5, and Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) when 29.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) | GLM-5.2 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 29.5 | 33.7 | +14.2% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 14.2% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $34.31 | $2,097.29 | +6012.8% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 61× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.63s | 28.14s | +164.7% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 164.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $1.40 / $4.40 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
GLM-5.2 (Max) vs Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low): 14.2% more intelligence, 6012.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 164.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- GLM-5.2 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low)GLM-5.2 (Max)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-low/glm-5-2 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-low/glm-5-2?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill