DeepSeek V3.2
VS
GLM 5.2
DeepSeek V3.2 vs GLM 5.2: which wins at real work?
22 task areas · same graded test runs · rank comparison only, so 0–100 and Elo collections never mix raw scores.
GLM 5.2 wins 22 of 22 task areas we tested; DeepSeek V3.2 takes 0. DeepSeek V3.2 costs 6.6× less per token ($0.572 vs $3.76 per 1M).
DeepSeek V3.2 costs 6.6× less per token ($0.572 vs $3.76 per 1M).
Task by task
| Task area | DeepSeek V3.2 | GLM 5.2 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding |
#100
/ 115
Usable
|
#23
/ 115
Strong
|
GLM 5.2 |
| RAG, Safety & Grounding |
#83
/ 113
Excellent
|
#6
/ 113
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Content & Brand |
#95
/ 124
Usable
|
#19
/ 124
Strong
|
GLM 5.2 |
| AI Strategy |
#102
/ 126
Usable
|
#34
/ 126
Strong
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Translation & Localization |
#89
/ 110
Strong
|
#28
/ 110
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Customer Support |
#74
/ 113
Usable
|
#16
/ 113
Strong
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Presentations & Decks |
#81
/ 110
Strong
|
#25
/ 110
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Legal & HR |
#90
/ 110
Strong
|
#36
/ 110
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Sales |
#91
/ 110
Usable
|
#39
/ 110
Usable
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Structured Output |
#67
/ 113
Strong
|
#25
/ 113
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Creative & Comedy | #87 / 110 | #46 / 110 | GLM 5.2 |
| Knowledge & Docs |
#58
/ 110
Usable
|
#21
/ 110
Strong
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Executive Assistant |
#76
/ 112
Usable
|
#43
/ 112
Strong
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Data & Analytics |
#69
/ 110
Excellent
|
#41
/ 110
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Investor & Pitch |
#46
/ 66
Usable
|
#24
/ 66
Strong
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Landing Pages |
#48
/ 72
Usable
|
#26
/ 72
Strong
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Summarization & Meeting Notes |
#30
/ 110
Excellent
|
#9
/ 110
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Chef / Home Cooking |
#78
/ 126
Usable
|
#59
/ 126
Usable
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Product & Project Management |
#21
/ 110
Excellent
|
#11
/ 110
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Training & Education |
#38
/ 110
Excellent
|
#29
/ 110
Excellent
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Frontend & Landing Pages |
#25
/ 109
Needs editing
|
#18
/ 109
Needs editing
|
GLM 5.2 |
| Research & Competitive Analysis |
#53
/ 110
Usable
|
#50
/ 110
Usable
|
GLM 5.2 |
Rank = position among every model config we tested in that task area (lower is better). Sorted by biggest gap first.
Frequently asked
Is DeepSeek V3.2 better than GLM 5.2?
Across 22 task areas we benchmarked, GLM 5.2 ranks higher in 22 and DeepSeek V3.2 in 0.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.2 or GLM 5.2?
DeepSeek V3.2 costs 6.6× less per token ($0.572 vs $3.76 per 1M).
What is GLM 5.2 better at?
GLM 5.2 out-ranks DeepSeek V3.2 at Coding, RAG, Safety & Grounding, Content & Brand.
More comparisons
This page is Spring Prompt, running in public
We just did this for every model. Do it for your prompt.
The rankings above come from running real tasks through real models and scoring every output. Spring Prompt is that same engine — pointed at your prompt, your test cases, and your definition of good.
- Generate test cases from your prompt — no eval set required to start.
- Compare models side by side with quality, cost and latency in one matrix.
- Optimise the winner until the scores say it's ready to ship.
Prompt × model results
12 test cases · 3 evals