Grok 4.1 FastvsGLM-5.2
Grok 4.1 Fast | GLM-5.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 744B |
Context window | — | 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. | 19% | 31%Best |
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. | — | 62.1% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.2Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor, on the refreshed v3.2 task set. Scores aren't comparable with v3.1. Higher is better. | — | 55% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | — | 54.6% |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.1Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 44% |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | — | 88% |
Agentic computer work Frontier-Bench v0.1A hard, ever-evolving set of real computer tasks — coding, system administration, data work, and more — that an AI agent has to complete on its own. Run by the Harbor / Laude Institute team as the successor to Terminal-Bench (v0.1 is the first release of the task set). The score is the share of tasks solved. Higher is better. | — | 5.1% |
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. | — | 81% |
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. | — | 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. | — | 54.7% |
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% |
Knowledge work GDPval-AA v2economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | — | 1514 |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | — | 1587 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | SpaceXAI | Z.ai |
| Release date | Nov 19 2025 | Jun 16 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
Which is better: Grok 4.1 Fast or GLM-5.2?
GLM-5.2 leads Grok 4.1 Fast on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (BullshitBench v2). Grok 4.1 Fast shipped 209 days before GLM-5.2, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Grok 4.1 Fast is proprietary, while GLM-5.2 is open weight.
On BullshitBench v2, GLM-5.2 leads at 31% vs Grok 4.1 Fast at 19%.
Frequently asked questions
Grok 4.1 Fast was released by SpaceXAI on Nov 19 2025.
GLM-5.2 was released by Z.ai on Jun 16 2026.
Grok 4.1 Fast is a proprietary model released by SpaceXAI. GLM-5.2 is an open weight model released by Z.ai.
Other comparisons
Grok 4.1 FastvsClaude Opus 5GLM-5.2vsClaude Opus 5Grok 4.1 FastvsGPT-5.6 SolGLM-5.2vsGPT-5.6 SolGrok 4.1 FastvsGemini 3.6 FlashGLM-5.2vsGemini 3.6 FlashGrok 4.1 FastvsMuse Spark 1.2GLM-5.2vsMuse Spark 1.2Grok 4.1 FastvsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731GLM-5.2vsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731Grok 4.1 FastvsMistral Medium 3.5GLM-5.2vsMistral Medium 3.5