DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) vs GLM-5.2 (Max)
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) by DeepSeek 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 9.0 points higher (33.7 vs 24.7) but costs 8.8× as much to run the benchmark ($2097 vs $239; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.2 (Max) when you need intelligence above 24.7, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) when 24.7 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) | GLM-5.2 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.7 | 33.7 | +36.4% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 36.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $238.91 | $2,097.29 | +777.9% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 8.8× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 2.71s | 29.78s | +998.9% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 998.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $1.40 / $4.40 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
GLM-5.2 (Max) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning): 36.4% more intelligence, 777.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 998.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- GLM-5.2 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)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/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/glm-5-2 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/glm-5-2?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill