AI Models · Open-Source vs Paid

GLM 5.2 Open vs Grok 4.5 Paid

GLM 5.2 vs Grok 4.5 compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Can the open-source model replace the paid one? Full 2026 breakdown.

Grok 4.5 — full profile ›

Prices & specs refreshed from live data · OpenSourceAI.tech

Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.

Choose GLM 5.2 if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose Grok 4.5 if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

GLM 5.2 vs Grok 4.5 specs

SpecGLM 5.2Grok 4.5
MakerZ.AIxAI
TypeOpen-weightProprietary
Context window1M tokens500K tokens
Input price$0.78/M · free self-host$2/M
Output price$2.44/M · free self-host$6/M
Vision / multimodalNoYes
Tool / function callingYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo (API only)
LicenseMITProprietary

Feature comparison

CapabilityGLM 5.2Grok 4.5
Open weights (downloadable)✓✗
Self-hostable✓✗
Runs fully offline✓✗
Vision / multimodal✗✓
Tool / function calling✓✓
1M+ context window✓✗

Benchmarks: GLM 5.2 vs Grok 4.5

Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).

GLM 5.2
Grok 4.5
Intelligence index
51.1
53.8
Coding index
68.8
72.4
GPQA
89.5%
93.1%
Humanity's Last Exam
40.1%
40.3%
Long Context Reasoning
71.3%
67.7%
SciCode
50.5%
54.1%
IFBench
73.3%
–
τ²-Bench
99.1%
–
τ-Bench Banking
26.8%
32.6%
Terminal-Bench
77.9%
81.6%
Terminal-Bench Hard
50.8%
–
Speed
198.1 tok/s
74.9 tok/s
Latency
0.85s
13.39s
Intelligence per $
23.8
17.9

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How GLM 5.2 and Grok 4.5 score

🏆 Best value & openness: GLM 5.2 (4.6 vs 3.2 / 5)
CriterionGLM 5.2Grok 4.5
Cost-efficiency4.54.0
Context window5.04.5
Openness5.01.5
Self-hosting5.01.0
Multimodality3.55.0

Scores come from live data — output price (cost), context length, open vs closed weights (openness & self-hosting) and vision/tool support (multimodality). Raw task quality isn't scored here; it depends on your benchmark — see the verdict.

What each model is

GLM 5.2 Open

Z.AI · Open-weight

GLM 5.2 is a large-scale reasoning model from Z.ai. It supports text input and output with a 1M-token context window, and is suited for long-horizon agent workflows, project-level software engineering,...

Grok 4.5 Paid

xAI · Proprietary

Grok 4.5 is SpaceXAI's smartest model with frontier performance on coding, knowledge work, and STEM.

Other models in these families

These variants are tracked but not compared here — one page per family keeps the comparison readable.

Other variants tracked
GLM 5GLM 5.1GLM 4.7GLM 4.7 FlashGLM 4.6GLM 4.5 AirGLM 5 TurboGLM 5V TurboGLM 4.5GLM 4.6VGLM 4.5V
Other variants tracked
Grok 4.3

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM 5.2 as good as Grok 4.5?

GLM 5.2 is open-weight and competitive on many tasks, but Grok 4.5 may still lead on the hardest reasoning and agentic work. The gap keeps narrowing — benchmark both on your actual use case before deciding.

Can I run GLM 5.2 locally?

Yes. GLM 5.2 has open weights, so you can self-host it on your own GPUs or run it via a low-cost API. Grok 4.5 is API-only and cannot be self-hosted.

How much cheaper is GLM 5.2?

GLM 5.2 costs $2.44/M output vs $6/M for Grok 4.5 — roughly 2x cheaper via API, and free if you self-host.

GLM 5.2 vs Grok 4.5 — which should I pick in 2026?

Choose GLM 5.2 if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose Grok 4.5 if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

People also compare

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Grok 4.5GLM 5.2 vs Claude Fable 5GLM 5.2 vs GPT-5.5GLM 5.2 vs GPT-5.6 SolGLM 5.2 vs Claude Opus 4.8GLM 5.2 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6

Explore more open-source AI

Browse the full open-source model leaderboard, thousands of tools and live benchmarks — all in one place.

Open the leaderboard →