AI Models · Open-Source vs Paid

GLM 5.2 Open vs Mistral Medium 3 Paid

GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Medium 3 compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Can the open-source model replace the paid one? Full 2026 breakdown.

Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai

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 Mistral Medium 3 if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Medium 3 specs

SpecGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3
MakerZ.AIMistral AI
TypeOpen-weightProprietary
Context window1M tokens131K tokens
Input price$0.63/M · free self-host$0.4/M
Output price$1.96/M · free self-host$2/M
Vision / multimodalNoYes
Tool / function callingYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo (API only)
LicenseMITProprietary

Feature comparison

CapabilityGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3
Open weights (downloadable)
Self-hostable
Runs fully offline
Vision / multimodal
Tool / function calling
1M+ context window

Benchmarks: GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Medium 3

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

GLM 5.2
Mistral Medium 3
Intelligence index
51.1
12.5
Coding index
68.8
GPQA
89.5%
57.8%
Humanity's Last Exam
40.1%
4.3%
Long Context Reasoning
71.3%
28%
SciCode
50.5%
33.1%
IFBench
73.3%
39.3%
τ²-Bench
99.1%
24.3%
τ-Bench Banking
26.8%
Terminal-Bench
77.9%
Terminal-Bench Hard
50.8%
3.8%
Math index
30.3
MMLU-Pro
76%
LiveCodeBench
40%
MATH-500
90.7%
AIME
44%
AIME 2025
30.3%
Speed
138.1 tok/s
0 tok/s
Latency
0.93s
0s
Intelligence per $
23.8
15.6

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3 score

🏆 Best value & openness: GLM 5.2 (4.6 vs 3.1 / 5)
CriterionGLM 5.2Mistral Medium 3
Cost-efficiency4.54.5
Context window5.03.5
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,...

Mistral Medium 3 Paid

Mistral AI · Proprietary

Mistral Medium 3 is a high-performance enterprise-grade language model designed to deliver frontier-level capabilities at significantly reduced operational cost. It balances state-of-the-art reasoning and multimodal performance with 8× lowe

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 5.1GLM 5GLM 5 TurboGLM 5V TurboGLM 4.7GLM 4.6GLM 4.7 FlashGLM 4.5GLM 4.6VGLM 4.5 AirGLM 4.5V

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM 5.2 as good as Mistral Medium 3?

GLM 5.2 is open-weight and competitive on many tasks, but Mistral Medium 3 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. Mistral Medium 3 is API-only and cannot be self-hosted.

GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Medium 3 — 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 Mistral Medium 3 if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

People also compare

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 →