The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.2 vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

GLM-5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.8 to 35.0. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is 2.9x cheaper per token.

Zhipu AI · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.2 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 44.8 to 35.0, ranking #44 overall.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, GLM-5.2 wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is roughly 2.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

GLM-5.2 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose GLM-5.2

  • overall performance matters — it scores 44.8 and ranks #44 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 4 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window

Choose Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

  • cost matters — it's about 2.9x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GLM-5.2
Zhipu AI
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
44.8
#44
35.0
#108
Reasoning
44.5
#43
36.2
#94
Coding
33.3
#39
21.0
#108
Agents
28.8
#52
16.5
#99
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
4 of 4
0 of 4
Input price
$0.75 / M
$0.20 / M
Output price
$2.40 / M
$1.00 / M
Context window
1,048,576
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
GLM-5.2
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Math
41.4#10
28.1#101
Tool use
20.1#69
11.0#133
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

19 reported for GLM-5.2 · 19 for Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

4 shared

GLM-5.2 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1), while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is better at 0 benchmarks.

GLM-5.2 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) costs less

For input processing, GLM-5.2 ($0.75/1M tokens) is 3.8x more expensive than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) ($0.20/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5.2 ($2.40/1M tokens) is 2.4x more expensive than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) ($1.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-5.2 is more expensive than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B).*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.2
Input tokens$0.75
Output tokens$2.40
Best providerDeepinfra
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Input tokens$0.20
Output tokens$1.00
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

633.0B diff

GLM-5.2 has 633.0B more parameters than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B), making it 527.5% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.2
753.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
120.0Bparameters
753.0B
GLM-5.2
120.0B
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GLM-5.2 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)'s 262,144 tokens. GLM-5.2 can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is limited to 262,144 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.2
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output1,048,576 tokens
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) supports multimodal inputs, whereas GLM-5.2 does not.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GLM-5.2

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5.2 is licensed under MIT, while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) uses OpenMDW License v1.1.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

GLM-5.2

MIT

Open weights

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

OpenMDW License v1.1

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5.2 was released on 2026-06-16, while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) was released on 2026-10-15.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is 4 months newer than GLM-5.2.

GLM-5.2

Jun 16, 2026

4 months ago

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Oct 15, 2026

2 days ago

4mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

GLM-5.2 is available from DeepInfra, Fireworks, FriendliAI, Novita, Together, ZAI. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is available from DeepInfra.

GLM-5.2

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.75/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.40/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $1.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M
friendli logo
FriendliAI
Input Price:Input: $1.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $1.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $1.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $1.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GLM-5.2 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5.2
✓ Preferred
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5.2 vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B).

Which is better, GLM-5.2 or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

GLM-5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.8 to 35.0. GLM-5.2 is made by Zhipu AI and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is made by NVIDIA. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does GLM-5.2 compare to Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) in benchmarks?

GLM-5.2 scores AIME 2026: 99.2%, HMMT 2025: 94.4%, HMMT Feb 26: 92.5%, GPQA: 91.2%, IMO-AnswerBench: 91.0%. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) scores GPQA: 89.5%, LiveCodeBench v6: 88.2%, CharXiv-R: 80.8%, MathVision: 78.2%, BrowseComp: 78.0%.

Is GLM-5.2 cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is 3.8x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5.2 costs $0.75/M input and $2.40/M output via deepinfra. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) costs $0.20/M input and $1.00/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5.2 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

GLM-5.2 supports 1.0M tokens and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GLM-5.2 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (44.8 vs 35.0), context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($0.75 vs $0.20/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5.2 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

GLM-5.2 is developed by Zhipu AI and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons