DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.2
A side-by-side comparison of two llm models — real specs, pricing, strengths and weaknesses, and a clear verdict on which to choose. Kept current by our agents.
Quick verdict: which should you choose?
Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro if you need
- ✓Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro if you need strong verified coding and STEM performance backed by an intelligence index of 44.3.
- ✓Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro if you need fast inference at 66.79 tokens per second and low cost at $0.87 per million tokens.
- ✓Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro if you need an open-weight model with clear structured outputs on long technical inputs.
- ✓Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro if you need transparent, benchmarked results rather than unverified claims.
Choose GLM 5.2 if you need
- ✓Choose GLM 5.2 if you need a proprietary model focused on extended unverified document tasks within million-token contexts.
- ✓Choose GLM 5.2 if you need versatility across general text workloads where performance details are not required.
- ✓Choose GLM 5.2 if you prefer closed-source handling of very large context windows despite higher cost.
Verdict
DeepSeek V4 Pro leads on measurable dimensions with a known intelligence index of 44.3, faster output at 66.79 t/s, and much lower price of $0.87 per million tokens, plus explicit strengths in coding and technical tasks. GLM 5.2 matches the million-token context but lacks any verified performance metrics, costs over five times more at $4.40 per million, and remains proprietary with unverified claims beyond context length. DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger choice for most users needing documented speed, cost-efficiency, and domain performance, while GLM 5.2 only appeals where unverified large-context versatility is prioritized.
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.2: side by side
| Spec | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM 5.2 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 44.3 | 50.7 | GLM 5.2 |
| Output speed | 62 t/s | 112 t/s | GLM 5.2 |
| Output price | $0.87/1M | $4.40/1M | DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Context | 1049K | 1049K | Tie |
| Params | — | — | Tie |
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.AI | Tie |
Detailed analysis
Intelligence & Performance
Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProDeepSeek V4 Pro provides a concrete intelligence index of 44.3 along with documented strengths in coding and technical domains. GLM 5.2 offers no intelligence metrics and states that performance details remain unverified beyond context length.
Pricing
Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProDeepSeek V4 Pro costs $0.87 per million tokens. GLM 5.2 costs $4.40 per million tokens, making DeepSeek more than five times cheaper on output.
Speed & Context
Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProDeepSeek V4 Pro reports output speed of 66.79 tokens per second with a 1,048,576-token context. GLM 5.2 shares the same context size but provides no speed data.
Model Access
Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProDeepSeek V4 Pro is open-weight while GLM 5.2 is proprietary, giving DeepSeek an edge for users who value weight access or fine-tuning potential.
DeepSeek V4 Pro
Pros
- +Strong performance on coding tasks
- +Effective handling of very long inputs
- +Clear and structured outputs
Cons
- –Text-only modality
- –No real-time information access
- –Can produce hallucinations on facts
GLM 5.2
Pros
- +Supports very large context windows
- +Strong performance on extended document tasks
- +Versatile across general text workloads
Cons
- –Text-only modality
- –No vision or multimodal capabilities
- –Performance details beyond context length remain unverified
Summary: DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.2
Users prioritizing speed, cost, verified intelligence, and open weights should select DeepSeek V4 Pro. GLM 5.2 is only preferable for proprietary deployments where large context handling is assumed without needing performance metrics.
Frequently asked questions
DeepSeek V4 Pro is better overall due to its published intelligence index, speed, lower price, and documented coding strengths compared to GLM 5.2's lack of verified metrics.