Mistral AIMistral Medium 3.5VSZ.ai (Zhipu AI)GLM-5.2
Our Take
Standardized reasoning and coding benchmarks are currently pending verification for one or both of these models. We recommend testing Mistral Medium 3.5 and GLM-5.2 directly in their respective provider playgrounds to see which fits your specific prompt styles best.
Was this recommendation helpful?
Benchmarks & Scores
Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/Acomplex codebases, multi-file repositories, and architectural planning
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
N/Agraduate-level science QA
Cost & Context
Cost (per 1M tokens)
$3.00Input: $1.50 | Output: $7.50Context Window
262.14k tokensBenchmarks & Scores
Coding (swe-bench-pro)
62.1%complex codebases, multi-file repositories, and architectural planning
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
91.2%graduate-level science QA
Cost & Context
Cost (per 1M tokens)1.4x cheaper
$2.15Input: $1.40 | Output: $4.40Context WindowLarger
1.05M tokensFrequently Asked Questions about Mistral Medium 3.5 vs GLM-5.2
GLM-5.2 is cheaper than Mistral Medium 3.5. GLM-5.2 has a blended cost of $2.15/1M tokens, which is about 1.4x cheaper than Mistral Medium 3.5 at $3.00/1M tokens.
Related Matchups
Explore similar comparisons for Mistral Medium 3.5 and GLM-5.2.
Do you want to find a model for your constraints?
Use our interactive model finder to filter LLMs by reasoning capability, coding performance, cost, and context length.