GLM-5.2 (max) vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.2 (max) by Z AI or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-07-17.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GLM-5.2 (max) scores 30.0 points higher (51.1 vs 21.1) but costs 3.7× as much to run the benchmark ($925 vs $247; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.2 (max) when you need intelligence above 21.1, and Qwen3 Coder Next when 21.1 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.2 (max) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 51.1 | 21.1 | −58.7% Qwen3 Coder Next is 58.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $924.71 | $247.26 | −73.3% Qwen3 Coder Next is 73.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 17.61s | 6.61s | −62.5% Qwen3 Coder Next is 62.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.40 / $4.40 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs GLM-5.2 (max): 58.7% less intelligence, 73.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 62.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.2 (max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Grok 4.5 (high) scores 53.80 for $602.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Terra (medium) scores 45.60 for $240.
GLM-5.2 (max)Qwen3 Coder NextToday's Pareto 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/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-2/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill