Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GLM-5.2
94
MiMo-V2.5
70
Verified leaderboard positions: GLM-5.2 #9 · MiMo-V2.5 unranked
Pick GLM-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2.5 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Agentic
+15.2 difference
Coding
+6.0 difference
GLM-5.2
MiMo-V2.5
$1.4 / $4.4
$null / $null
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1M
1M
Pick GLM-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2.5 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
GLM-5.2 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 94 to 70. 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 65.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 81% to 65.8%.
GLM-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 94 to 70. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 81% and 65.8%.
GLM-5.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 62.1 versus 56.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GLM-5.2 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81 versus 65.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.