GLM-5.2 (Max) vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.2 (Max) by Z AI or GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI? 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 13.0 points higher (33.7 vs 20.7) but costs 6.3× as much to run the benchmark ($2097 vs $331; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.2 (Max) when you need intelligence above 20.7, and GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when 20.7 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.2 (Max) | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 33.7 | 20.7 | −38.6% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 38.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,097.29 | $331.24 | −84.2% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 84.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.14s | 69.42s | +146.7% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 146.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.40 / $4.40 | $0.20 / $1.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs GLM-5.2 (Max): 38.6% less intelligence, 84.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 146.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.2 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
GLM-5.2 (Max)GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)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/glm-5-2/gpt-5-4-nano · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-2/gpt-5-4-nano?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill