Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. GLM 5.2vsLing 3.0 Flash
Updated Jul 2026

GLM 5.2vsLing 3.0 Flash

Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper than GLM 5.2 at $0.021/M vs $1.4/M input tokens.

GLM 5.2 and Ling 3.0 Flash compared across 3 shared prompts
SpecGLM 5.2Ling 3.0 Flash
Input price$1.4/M tokens$0.021/M tokens
Output price$4.4/M tokens$0.063/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens262K tokens
WeightsOpenOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)Yes (1 provider)No
ReleasedJun 2026Jul 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 2 of the 3 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Explain Like I'm a Specific Expert

Explain how a large language model (like GPT or Claude) learns and generates text to each of these three audiences: 1. **An experienced…

GLM 5.2745 words
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.
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash1,129 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer Think of an LLM as a system that learns a massive, multidimensional routing table. When you built distributed systems, you learned patterns from traffic logs — which endpoints get hammered at 3am, which failure modes correlate, which request chains tend to cascade.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

GLM 5.2250 words
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…
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash248 words
🍝 Honey Fire Twirls A sticky-sweet, spicy, savory pasta that comes together in minutes. 🧺 Ingredients (7 pantry staples) Spaghetti (or penne) — 8 oz Olive oil — 2 tablespoons Garlic, minced — 4 cloves Honey — 3 tablespoons Soy sauce — 2 tablespoons Red pepper flakes — ½ teaspoon (adjust to taste) Parmesan cheese…
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
GLM 5.2
GLM 5.2
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Ling 3.0 Flash costs 70x less per token.

Too close to call
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

GLM 5.2
Input
$1.40
Output
$4.40
Ling 3.0 Flash
Input
$0.02
67× cheaper
Output
$0.06
70× cheaper

Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper on both: 67× input, 70× output.

Where to run it

25 hosts, cheapest first

GLM 5.223 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Baidu Qianfanfp8$0.56 in·$1.76 out·1M·99.9% upDDeepInfrafp4$0.56 in·$1.80 out·1M·98.8% upAAmbientfp8$0.60 in·$2.00 out·203k·99.1% upSStreamLakefp8$0.64 in·$2.01 out·1M·99.5% upNNovitafp8$0.65 in·$2.04 out·1M·99.9% upDDigitalOcean$0.70 in·$2.20 out·262k·98.1% up
17 more hostsFewer hosts
CCoreWeavefp4$0.76 in·$2.42 out·1M·99.9% upAAtlasCloudfp8$0.94 in·$2.95 out·1M·99.9% upAlibaba Cloudfp8$0.97 in·$3.04 out·1M·99.9% upIInceptronfp4$1.01 in·$3.18 out·1M·98.7% upSSiliconFlowfp8$1.19 in·$3.74 out·1M·99.9% upPPhalafp8$1.26 in·$3.00 out·1M·99.2% upBBasetenfp8$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·100% upCloudflare Workers AI$1.40 in·$4.40 out·262k·99.9% upFFireworks$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.9% upFFriendli$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.8% upGGMI Cloudfp8$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·98.8% upPParasailfp4$1.40 in·$4.40 out·262k·99.9% upTTogether$1.40 in·$4.40 out·512k·99.5% upVVenicefp8$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.8% upWWafer$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.5% upZ.aifp8$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.7% upDDecartfp4$2.25 in·$8.00 out·1M·99.8% up
Ling 3.0 Flash2 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
NNovita$0.02 in·$0.06 out·262k·100% upDDeepInfrabf16$0.06 in·$0.18 out·131k·99.5% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 22 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

GLM 5.2 is developed by Zhipu AI while Ling 3.0 Flash is developed by inclusionAI. GLM 5.2 has a 1.0M token context window vs Ling 3.0 Flash's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 3 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. GLM 5.2 and Ling 3.0 Flash each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 3 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

GLM 5.2 costs $1.4/M input tokens and Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.021/M input tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash is $1.38/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 Ling 3.0 Flash 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.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

GLM 5.2 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
GLM 5.2 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
GLM 5.2 logoHy3 logo
GLM 5.2 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
GLM 5.2 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
GLM 5.2 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoGLM 5.3 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
GLM 5.2 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
GLM 5.2 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs GLM 5.3 FlashLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

GLM 5.2 logoGLM 5.3 logo
GLM 5.2 vs GLM 5.3Same lab
GLM 5.2 logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
GLM 5.2 vs GLM 5.3 FlashSame lab
Ling 3.0 Flash logoLing 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash logoLing 3.0 Flash Sante (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (free)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash logoGLM 5.3 FlashX logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs GLM 5.3 FlashXCross-provider
GLM 5.2 logoGolden Gate Claude logo
GLM 5.2 vs Golden Gate ClaudeNew provider
GLM 5.2 logoGPT-2 logo
GLM 5.2 vs GPT-2New provider
Ling 3.0 Flash logoGPT-3.5 Turbo logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs GPT-3.5 TurboNew provider

Model pages

GLM 5.2 logo
GLM 5.258 outputs, specs and price
Ling 3.0 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash3 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed