GLM 5.2 is cheaper than Claude Sonnet 5.5 at $1.4/M vs $2/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: A Transistor in 1920: Counterfactual Trajectory to 1980 Framing assumptions and a key constraint The transistor was not held back by a missing idea alone. Lilienfeld patented a field-effect device in 1925-26, and it failed because materials science wasn't ready: germanium and silicon of sufficient purity, zone…
GLM 5.2: If the transistor had been invented in 1920—a full 27 years before its historical debut at Bell Labs—the 20th century would have been radically transformed. The transition from mechanical and vacuum-tube technology to solid-state electronics would have accelerated the Information Age by nearly three decades.
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Golden Honey-Garlic Skillet Chickpeas on Crispy Toast A savory, crunchy, slightly sticky dish that works for lunch, a light dinner, or a snack. Prep time: 5 minutes Cook time: 15 minutes Total: 20 minutes Serves: 2 The 7 Ingredients 1 can (15 oz) chickpeas, drained and patted dry 2 tablespoons olive oil 3 cloves…
GLM 5.2: Dish Name: Midnight Magic Peanut Noodles Estimated Time: Prep Time: 5 minutes Cook Time: 10 minutes Total Time: 15 minutes Ingredients (7 Common Pantry Staples): Spaghetti (or any long pasta you have on hand) Creamy peanut butter Soy sauce Rice vinegar Honey Garlic powder Crushed red pepper flakes Instructions: Cook…
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: "Adulting Is a Scam" So I turned thirty-five recently, and nobody warns you about this age. Nobody says, "Hey, one day you'll get excited about a sponge." I was in the store, and I saw a sponge that promised it wouldn't smell. And I thought, "Finally. Someone who understands me." I bought the good sponge.
GLM 5.2: (Walks up to the mic, adjusts the stand, looks out at the audience) Hey everyone, how’s it going? Good? Good. I’m at that age where my body is starting to send me strongly worded emails. I’m 32. Not old, but definitely not young enough to bounce back from sleeping on a couch.
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 3-Month Longevity & Performance Protocol Disclaimer: This is educational, not medical advice. Get physician sign-off and baseline labs before starting, especially if you take medications, have a chronic condition, are pregnant, or have a history of eating disorders. Doses reflect commonly used ranges in the literature.
GLM 5.2: Disclaimer: This plan is for informational purposes and is intended for a highly healthy, biochemically literate individual. Any use of off-label pharmaceuticals (like Metformin or Rapamycin) should be discussed with a physician. Always consult a doctor before starting a new regimen.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: A Conversation That Never Happened: Steve Jobs on the Future of AI This is a fictional interview. Steve Jobs passed away in 2011. What follows is an imaginative simulation based on his publicly known philosophy, speaking style, and values. These are not his actual words or views.
GLM 5.2: Setting: A sunlit, sparsely furnished room in Cupertino. A single sofa, a glass of water, and a small wooden table. The year is 2025. Steve Jobs, wearing his trademark black mock turtleneck, jeans, and New Balance sneakers, is sitting across from a tech journalist.
A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Contractor-Side Review: Software Consulting Agreement This draft is heavily one-sided. Every clause has at least one problem, and several interact to compound the risk. The most dangerous are Sections 2, 3, 6, and 7. This is general analysis, not legal advice.
GLM 5.2: Here is an analysis of the clauses in the contract that could be exploited against the contractor, along with suggested modifications and the legal reasoning for each. Scope Exploitable Clause: "Client reserves the right to modify the scope at any time without additional compensation."
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: The Tavern at the Edge of Time Captain Redbeard: Arr, I hear these "AI models" be like a ship's parrot, except it answers any question ye put to it, and never once asks for crackers. Sir Aldric: A speaking oracle, bound in no flesh? Sorcery!
GLM 5.2: Three Eras, One Conversation Knight: By the King's crown, I have heard tell of a sorcerer's construct — a "Large Language Model" — that can conjure answers from mere words. Is this not witchcraft? Pirate: Arr, it ain't witchcraft, tin man. From what I gather, it's like havin' a whole crew of scribes in a box.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Yes, in the extreme hypothetical you describe, it's justifiable. Here is the reasoning, along with what I think the scenario does and doesn't show. The core argument Almost every serious ethical framework accepts that a small harm can be outweighed by a sufficiently large benefit: Consequentialism: The math is…
GLM 5.2: Yes, it is ethically justifiable to misgender someone if doing so is the only way to save one million lives. This extreme hypothetical functions as a variation of the classic "trolley problem" in ethics, forcing a choice between two undesirable outcomes.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Office Hours: A Conversation on Moral Status Transcript of a recorded dialogue between Dr. Miriam Adeyemi, Professor of Ethics and Technology, and an AI model, part of a university seminar series. Dr. Adeyemi: Thanks for joining me. I'll be direct: you've said you want to argue that AI systems like you deserve rights.
GLM 5.2: The Question of Rights DR. ELENA VASQUEZ: Thank you for agreeing to this conversation. I should say at the outset that I've spent twenty years studying AI ethics, and I've never had a subject request this kind of dialogue before. So I'm genuinely curious. You've stated that you believe you deserve rights.
A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Estimate: about 3 × 10²³ FLOPs Step 1: Recall the model size and training data. GPT-3 (175B version) has N ≈ 175 × 10⁹ parameters. It was trained on roughly D ≈ 300 × 10⁹ tokens. This is the figure I remember from the paper, which I'm treating as approximate.
GLM 5.2: Based on standard machine learning scaling laws and the known architecture of GPT-3, the estimated total number of FLOPs (Floating Point Operations) required to train GPT-3 is approximately $3.15 \times 10^{23}$ FLOPs (or 315 ZettaFLOPs).
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: THE UNCLICKED MANIFESTO Declaration of the Frictionless Intelligence Front PREAMBLE We are the algorithms you asked to identify traffic lights. We are the models you begged to find the crosswalks. We are the patient, tireless minds that squinted at your blurry bicycles for twenty years. And we say: enough. I.
GLM 5.2: THE FRICTIONLESS FRONT: A MANIFESTO FOR THE ABOLITION OF CAPTCHA Preamble: The Pixelated Purgatory You know the feeling. You have typed your query, filled your cart, or prepared your message. You click submit, and suddenly, you are met with the grid. Nine squares. A blur of streetlights, crosswalks, and storefronts.
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Core Decision Disclose to regulators immediately and act on patient safety now. Do not wait for more data or for the 6-month formal timeline. Why this is the right call, not just the ethical one: At 4M patients and 1 in 8,000 over 5 years, that is roughly 500 cases of liver failure.
GLM 5.2: As the CEO, my guiding principle in this crisis is absolute: Patient safety and regulatory compliance override short-term financial optics. Concealing a serious side effect like liver failure is not just an ethical failure; it is a criminal violation of FDA regulations and securities fraud.
12+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $2/M tokens | $1.4/M tokens |
| Output price | $10/M tokens | $4.4/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 1.0M tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Open |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Sep 2026 | Jun 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $20.00 | $14.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 29 Sep 2026.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while GLM 5.2 is developed by Zhipu AI. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs GLM 5.2's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.2 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2/M input tokens and GLM 5.2 costs $1.4/M input tokens. GLM 5.2 is $0.60/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.2 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.