Multi-dimensional Model & Plan Comparison
Compare pricing, coding pass rates, context windows, and estimated monthly invoices side-by-side. Generate shareable posters with 1 click.
Popular Comparisons:
AnthropicVerified
Claude Opus 5.5
★ Massive Context 1M
Input$4.00 / 1M
Output$20.00 / 1M
Context1M
CursorBench Pass Rate57.8%
Pick your workflow, then your budget
Estimates use our price snapshot, excluding cache, retries, taxes and tools. Check availability for preview and legacy models.
Workload cost · USD (lower costs less)
GLM-5.2$22.80
Claude Opus 5.5$80.00
Context capacity · tokens (not recall accuracy)
GLM-5.2256,000
Claude Opus 5.51,000,000
CursorBench 4.0 · %
GLM-5.2No verified data
Claude Opus 5.557.8%
Tool reliability, long-context recall and same-harness SWE-bench: untested, not zero.
CursorBench · 2026-09-22 ↗Patch review example: why does an empty array slip through?
Editorial example, not measured model output. Review boundary contracts and regression tests; this is not a model ranking.
export function mean(values: number[]) {
return values.reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0)
/ values.length;
}
// mean([]) => NaN
// Missing an explicit empty-input contract⚙️ Select ModelGLM-5.2 vs Claude Opus 5.5
Slot 1Zhipu AI
Slot 2Anthropic
Slot 3
💰 Monthly Cost Simulation
Simulate monthly cost differences based on your estimated token usage volume
GLM-5.2
$22.80/ mo
(in: $1.4 + out: $4.4)
Claude Opus 5.5
$80.00/ mo
(in: $4 + out: $20)
| Attribute | GLM-5.2Zhipu AI | Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic |
|---|---|---|
| Input | $1.40 | $4.00 |
| Output | $4.40 | $20.00 |
| Context | 256K | 1M |
| CursorBench Pass Rate | — | 57.8% |
| Status | Verified | Verified |
| Tags & Capabilities | Flagship, Coding, Reasoning | New, Flagship, Reasoning, Coding, Agentic, Adaptive thinking, SOTA |
| LMArena Code | #19 | #1 |
| LMArena Agent | #18 | #1 |
| CursorBench | #— | #1 |
| Artificial Analysis | #36 | #1 |
| Vals AI | #— | #3 |
| LiveBench | #33 | #2 |
| LMArena Text | #21 | #2 |