GLM 5.2 at Mistral's official rate versus OpenAI's balanced flagship.
zai-glm-5-2 · zai
gpt-5.6-terra · openai
Benchmark
| Workload Scenario | GLM 5.2 | GPT-5.6 Terra | Price Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1M input tokens (raw text) | $1.40 | $2.00 | −$0.60 |
| 1M output tokens (generation) | $4.40 | $12.00 | −$7.60 |
| 1M tokens · 70% input / 30% output mix | $2.30 | $5.00 | −$2.70 |
| Standard chat turn (4K in / 800 out, 50% cached) | $0.0066 | $0.014 | −$0.0074 |
| Monthly scale (10K requests / day) | $1,980.00 | $4,200.00 | −$2,220.00 |
Negative difference = GLM 5.2 is cheaper. Positive = GPT-5.6 Terra is cheaper.
Scaling Curve
Total cost of a token volume at 70/30 input/output split (uncached). Log-log scale.
Verdict
GLM 5.2 is cheaper on both input and output rates, so it costs less at every input/output mix. Price alone still isn't the whole decision: capability, latency and context limits (GLM 5.2: 200K, GPT-5.6 Terra: 1.1M) may justify the premium for your task.
FAQ
On input, GLM 5.2 is cheaper ($1.40/M vs $2.00/M). On output, GLM 5.2 is cheaper ($4.40/M vs $12.00/M). The same model is cheaper on both sides, so it wins at every mix.
A chat-style request (4,000 input + 800 output tokens, 50% cached) costs $0.0066 on GLM 5.2 and $0.014 on GPT-5.6 Terra — GLM 5.2 is 2.1× cheaper for that workload.
GLM 5.2 supports 200,000 tokens (32.8K max output); GPT-5.6 Terra supports 1,050,000 (128K max output). GPT-5.6 Terra fits 5.3× more context, which matters for long documents and agents.