Skip to main content

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) vs GLM-5.2

Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)

84

VS

GLM-5.2

94

2 categoriesvs1 categories

Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) #10 · GLM-5.2 #9

Pick GLM-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.

Category Radar

Head-to-Head by Category

Category Breakdown

Agentic

GLM-5.2
74.9vs81

+6.1 difference

Coding

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
72.9vs62.1

+10.8 difference

Knowledge

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
68.2vs67.2

+1.0 difference

Operational Comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)

GLM-5.2

Price (per 1M tokens)

$5 / $25

$1.4 / $4.4

Speed

N/A

N/A

Latency (first answer)

N/A

N/A

Context Window

1M

1M

Quick Verdict

Pick GLM-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.

GLM-5.2 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 94 to 84. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GLM-5.2's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 81 against 74.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 69.4% to 81%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.40 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens for GLM-5.2. That is roughly 5.7x on output cost alone.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 94 to 84. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 69.4% and 81%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or GLM-5.2?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.2 versus 67.2. Inside this category, HLE w/o tools is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or GLM-5.2?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.9 versus 62.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81 versus 74.9. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: June 16, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.