text model comparison
GLM-5.2 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
DeepSeek V4 Pro costs less than GLM-5.2 at every mix of input and output — $0.28/M against $0.82/M on input and $0.55/M against $2.55/M on output — so at 100M input and 20M output tokens a month it comes to $39.00 against $133.00, a difference of $94.00, and what GLM-5.2 holds over it is context rather than price — 200K against 160K, 1.3× wider.
Side by side
| GLM-5.2 | DeepSeek V4 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Our rate — input | $0.82/M | $0.28/M |
| Our rate — output | $2.55/M | $0.55/M |
| Our rate — cached input | $0.16/M | $0.055/M |
| Official rate — input | $1.40/M | $0.43/M |
| Official rate — output | $4.40/M | $0.87/M |
| Below official | 42% | 37% |
| Context window | 200K | 160K |
| Publisher | Z.ai | DeepSeek |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Released | Jun 30, 2026 | May 21, 2026 |
| Model id | z-ai/glm-5.2 | deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro |
| Callable today | Yes | Yes |
What it costs, at 100M input and 20M output tokens a month
One volume, both models, this catalogue’s published rates. Your figure will differ; the arithmetic will not, and the ratio of the two columns is the part that transfers to your own numbers.
| Model | At our rates | At official rates |
|---|---|---|
| GLM-5.2 | $133.00 | $228.00 |
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | $39.00 | $60.90 |
At this volume DeepSeek V4 Pro is $94.00 cheaper than GLM-5.2 — 71% less. That ordering holds at any ratio of input to output, because the cheaper model is cheaper on every rate rather than on one column.
Excludes cached-input savings, which on a repeated-prefix workload reduce the input side substantially. Cached rates are in the table above and on the pricing page.
When to pick each
Pick GLM-5.2
- It holds 200K in one request against 160K — 1.3× wider, which decides whether a long input is one call or a map-reduce.
- The catalogue lists it for general-purpose production workloads, structured output and function calling at scale and bilingual EN/ZH applications.
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro
- Input costs $0.28/M against GLM-5.2's $0.82/M, which decides the bill on input-heavy work — long documents in, short answers out.
- Output costs $0.55/M against GLM-5.2's $2.55/M, which is the whole bill on generation-heavy work where a short brief produces long copy.
- Cached input is $0.055/M against GLM-5.2's $0.16/M, and on an agent loop the repeated prefix is most of every request.
- The catalogue lists it for cost-sensitive batch processing at scale, math and reasoning-heavy evaluation pipelines and agent loops with large repeated system prompts.
Every line above is a field in the model catalogue rather than a judgement about output quality. This site publishes no benchmark results, so which model answers your prompts better is a measurement to run on your own traffic — the same key calls both.
Questions
- Which is cheaper, GLM-5.2 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
- DeepSeek V4 Pro, at 100M input and 20M output tokens a month: $39.00 against $133.00, a difference of $94.00 — 71% less. That holds at any ratio of input to output on this pairing, because DeepSeek V4 Pro has the lower rate on every column, not just the one the headline quotes. What the arithmetic does not tell you is whether both models do your job to the same standard; that is a measurement on your own prompts, not a number we can publish.
- Can I call both GLM-5.2 and DeepSeek V4 Pro today?
- Yes — both. Requests naming `z-ai/glm-5.2` or `deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro` reach a live upstream today and are billed at the rates above. 7 of the 24 models in this catalogue are callable right now; the rest are listed at their intended price and marked, so you find out here rather than from an error at call time.
- How much context does GLM-5.2 hold compared with DeepSeek V4 Pro?
- GLM-5.2 takes 204,800 tokens (200K) in a single request against DeepSeek V4 Pro's 163,840 (160K) — 1.3× wider. The window is a cost decision before it is a capability one: an input that does not fit has to be split, summarised in pieces and summarised again, which bills the source text more than once. Below that line the wider window is capacity you are not using.
- What licences are GLM-5.2 and DeepSeek V4 Pro under?
- Both are MIT — GLM-5.2 from Z.ai and DeepSeek V4 Pro from DeepSeek. Licence is therefore not a differentiator on this pairing, which is worth knowing before it becomes the question a legal review opens with. Read the text itself before shipping either; a licence name is a pointer to terms, not a summary of them.
- How do I switch between GLM-5.2 and DeepSeek V4 Pro?
- Change the model id and nothing else. Both are served from `https://router.xark.io/api/v1` behind the same OpenAI-compatible contract — `z-ai/glm-5.2` and `deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro` — so the request shape, the streaming frames, the usage block and the error envelope are identical between them. Send an explicit id and no substitution happens underneath you, which is what makes running both and comparing the two on your own traffic a change of one string rather than a migration.
- How do these rates compare with the official ones?
- Both rows are published side by side rather than as a single discount claim. GLM-5.2 is 42% below Z.ai's official rate and DeepSeek V4 Pro is 37% below DeepSeek's, which at 100M input and 20M output tokens a month is $133.00 against an official $228.00 for GLM-5.2, and $39.00 against $60.90 for DeepSeek V4 Pro. The claim on this site is only that our rate sits below the model publisher's own — not that no one else is cheaper. Where a third-party provider undercuts us on either model, that provider's rate is printed on that model's own page.