Claude Opus 4.8 vs GLM-5.2
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8 | Z.ai GLM-5.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | Z.ai |
| Release date | May 28 2026 | Jun 16 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 744B |
Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 95% | — |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 69.2%Best | 62.1% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 74.6% | 81%Best |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 49.8%Best | 40.5% |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 57.9% | — |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | — | 91.2% |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 83.4% | — |
Agentic financial analysis Finance Agent v2Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | 53.9% | — |
Knowledge work GDPval-AAMeasures how well the AI does economically valuable knowledge work, judged against human experts. Shown as a rating (like a chess Elo) — higher is better. | 1890 | — |
| Timeline | ||
| Release gap | Claude Opus 4.8 shipped 19 days before GLM-5.2 | |
Which is better: Claude Opus 4.8 or GLM-5.2?
Claude Opus 4.8 leads GLM-5.2 on 2 of the 3 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Humanity's Last Exam). Claude Opus 4.8 shipped 19 days before GLM-5.2, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Claude Opus 4.8) vs 1M (GLM-5.2). Claude Opus 4.8 is proprietary, while GLM-5.2 is open weight.
On SWE-Bench Pro, Claude Opus 4.8 leads at 69.2% vs GLM-5.2 at 62.1%. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, GLM-5.2 leads at 81% vs Claude Opus 4.8 at 74.6%. On Humanity's Last Exam · no tools, Claude Opus 4.8 leads at 49.8% vs GLM-5.2 at 40.5%.
Frequently asked questions
Claude Opus 4.8 was released by Anthropic on May 28 2026.
GLM-5.2 was released by Z.ai on Jun 16 2026.
Claude Opus 4.8 leads on SWE-Bench Pro — Claude Opus 4.8 69.2% vs GLM-5.2 62.1%.
Claude Opus 4.8 leads on Humanity's Last Exam · no tools — Claude Opus 4.8 49.8% vs GLM-5.2 40.5%.
Claude Opus 4.8 has a 1M context window; GLM-5.2 has 1M.
Claude Opus 4.8 is a proprietary model released by Anthropic. GLM-5.2 is an open weight model released by Z.ai.