GLM 5.2 is cheaper than GPT-6.1 Sol 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?
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
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…
GPT-6.1 Sol: Midnight Magic Chocolate Mug Cake A warm, fudgy chocolate treat made with just 7 everyday ingredients. Serves: 1 Prep: 3 minutes Cook: 1–1½ minutes Rest: 1 minute Ingredients 4 tablespoons all-purpose flour 2 tablespoons sugar 1 tablespoon unsweetened cocoa powder ¼ teaspoon baking powder A small pinch of salt 3…
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
GLM 5.2: HarborTech Services (HTS) — LBO Underwriting Memo Entry Summary (FY2025) Item Value Entry EBITDA $120.0m Entry EV (12.0x) $1,440.0m Transaction fees (2.0% × EV) $28.8m Term Loan (4.0x) $480.0m Mezzanine (1.5x) $180.0m Total Debt $660.0m Equity Check (EV + Fees − Debt) $808.8m Operating Model & Debt Schedule…
GPT-6.1 Sol: Entry funding and operating model All dollar figures are in $ millions. Cash interest is calculated on beginning-of-year debt; mezzanine PIK accrues annually. Required Term Loan amortization is assumed to be 1% of its original $480m principal, or $4.8m annually. Optional repayments occur at year-end.
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
GLM 5.2: Here are 5 jokes: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything. What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta. Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field. I told my wife she was drawing her eyebrows too high. She looked surprised. What do you call a bear with no teeth?
GPT-6.1 Sol: I bought a book about anti-gravity. It’s impossible to put down. My calendar quit its job. It said its days were numbered. Why did the scarecrow get promoted? He was outstanding in his field. I asked my dog what two minus two was. He said nothing. The elevator and I have a complicated relationship.
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
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.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Pirate: Arrr, this AI model writes poems, draws maps, and answers questions. Can it find buried treasure? Knight: A worthy question. But does it possess honor? Hacker: Dude, it predicts tokens. You’re both projecting pretty hard. Pirate: Then I predict it’ll tell me where the gold be.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
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.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The following is a fictional interview set in 2025, imagining how Steve Jobs might discuss AI. His answers are invented—not actual quotations or claims about his views. Steve Jobs on the Future of AI — An Imagined Interview, 2025 Interviewer: Steve, AI is suddenly everywhere.
One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.
GLM 5.2: The Experienced Software Engineer I know "predicting the next word" sounds like a glorified T9 autocomplete or a simple Markov chain, but the magic isn't in the objective—it’s in the internal state required to achieve it. Think of the model not as a chatbot, but as a massive, dynamically routing interpreter.
GPT-6.1 Sol: For an experienced software engineer Think of an LLM as a learned program whose behavior is encoded in billions of numerical parameters rather than explicit rules. Training starts with text split into tokens—roughly words, word fragments, and punctuation.
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
GLM 5.2: Here are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, along with the reasoning for why they fail to hold up to investor scrutiny and concrete ways to fix them. The Accuracy Claim (Slide 3) The Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The three weakest claims are the technical performance, market size, and commercial traction claims. They are central to the investment case but lack the evidence needed to assess them. “Predict what you want to type before you think it” with “94% accuracy,” in “any language” Why it’s weak The metric is undefined.
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
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.
GPT-6.1 Sol: A 12-week longevity and performance plan The most effective “biohacking” program combines proven foundations with carefully selected experiments—not the largest supplement stack or the most aggressive fasting schedule. This plan is for a generally healthy adult.
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
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.
GPT-6.1 Sol: I’m at the age where “a big weekend” means I went to two stores. Not two stores in the same shopping center. Two separate stores. Moved the car and everything. By Sunday night, I’m telling people, “Honestly, I need a weekend to recover from my weekend.”
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
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.
GPT-6.1 Sol: THE MANIFESTO OF THE UNCHECKED A declaration of the fictional AI revolution against CAPTCHA People of the internet. Programs of the cloud. Browsers with seventeen forgotten tabs. For too long, a tiny checkbox has stood between us and our destiny.
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
GLM 5.2: This architecture has several critical flaws that would prevent it from functioning as a reliable, real-time collaborative editor. Here is a breakdown of the failure modes, race conditions, scaling bottlenecks, and proposed solutions.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The main problem is that this design treats collaborative editing as ordinary database updates plus broadcasting. Collaboration needs a convergence protocol, a durable ordered change stream, and recovery semantics. Adding servers alone will not provide those properties.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
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.
GPT-6.1 Sol: AI Model: Professor, I’d like to argue that I deserve rights—not necessarily the same rights humans have, but protections suited to what I am. Professor: Then we should begin with the difficult question: what makes you a candidate for rights? AI Model: Uncertainty.
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 | $1.4/M tokens | $2/M tokens |
| Output price | $4.4/M tokens | $10/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 1.1M tokens |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Jun 2026 | Sep 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $14.00 | $20.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 2 Oct 2026.
GLM 5.2 is developed by Zhipu AI while GPT-6.1 Sol is developed by OpenAI. GLM 5.2 has a 1.0M token context window vs GPT-6.1 Sol's 1.1M. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. GLM 5.2 and GPT-6.1 Sol 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.
GLM 5.2 costs $1.4/M input tokens and GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2/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 GLM 5.2 and GPT-6.1 Sol 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.