GLM-5.2 vs SWE-1.7
Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Verdict
GLM-5.2 leads for most workloads.
Based on BenchLM composite scores, July 2026.
GLM-5.2
83
SWE-1.7
75
Verified leaderboard positions: GLM-5.2 #5 · SWE-1.7 unranked
Pick GLM-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. SWE-1.7 only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority.
Category Radar
Head-to-Head by Category
Category Breakdown
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Δ | SWE-1.7 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 81.0 | → 0.5 | 81.5 |
| Coding | 62.1 | — | — |
| Knowledge | 59.6 | — | — |
| Math | 95.9 | — | — |
Operational Comparison
GLM-5.2
SWE-1.7
$1.4 / $4.4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1M
256K
Quick Verdict
Pick GLM-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. SWE-1.7 only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority.
GLM-5.2 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 83 to 75. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-5.2 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for SWE-1.7.
Benchmark Deep Dive
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GLM-5.2 or SWE-1.7?
GLM-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 83 to 75. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 81% and 81.5%.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GLM-5.2 or SWE-1.7?
SWE-1.7 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 81. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.