Claude Fable 5 vs GLM-5.2
Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic) and GLM-5.2 (Z.ai (Zhipu AI)) compared on benchmarks, pricing, context window, and use-case rankings.
- Claude Fable 5 leads on overall intelligence (ECI 161 vs 153).
- GLM-5.2 is cheaper on input tokens — $0.93 vs $10.00 per 1M.
- GLM-5.2 has a larger context window (1M vs 1M tokens).
- Claude Fable 5 ranks higher for coding (100th vs 88th percentile).
Use-case scores are 0–100 percentile composites across each area’s benchmarks, ranked against every model from the past year. Highlighted cells lead each row. Open a model for the full picture.
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5 better than GLM-5.2?
On Epoch AI's Capabilities Index, Claude Fable 5 scores higher (161) than GLM-5.2 (153). The right pick depends on your task — compare their coding, math, and reasoning scores in the table above.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or GLM-5.2?
GLM-5.2 is cheaper on input tokens at $0.93 per million, versus $10.00 (representative OpenRouter pricing).
Which has a larger context window, Claude Fable 5 or GLM-5.2?
GLM-5.2 supports up to 1M tokens, compared with 1M for the other.
Which is better for coding, Claude Fable 5 or GLM-5.2?
Across coding benchmarks like SWE-bench Verified and Terminal-Bench, Claude Fable 5 ranks higher — 100th vs 88th percentile among the models tracked on Model Beat.
Want a different match-up? Open the compare tool to add or swap models.
More comparisons
Benchmarks & model data from Epoch AI (CC BY); pricing & specs from OpenRouter. ECI = Epoch Capabilities Index.