The model is 756B parameters, open weights.

i think GLM 5.2 is not cheap and not easy to get the coding plan... so even it's on the Opus level... still not attractive.

I'm really feeling a bit tired of these models. I feel that since opus 4.1, I haven't been able to clearly feel the intelligence improvement from the model upgrades (except for gpt 5.5 and opus4.6 being able to speak like a human)

The text only part is the catch for me.

If it builds a UI and can't look at it, it's askin ls whether the app looks right.

GLM is the most overrated LLM. I tried it and it not good.

If you are a real engineer and uses the LLM as a pair programmer instead of delegating everything to it, even GLM 4.7 was already good enough to help you with a lot of work.

I used it with Cerebras inference at a time when it had a good coding plan at a low price, and delivered tons of stuff using it.

For those praising GLM 5.2, can anyone confirm?

Tried with 2 harnesses and it seems bad + slow

GLM cannot use vision like Opus can. This is not a useful comparison.

What is this fashion of testing models by giving them one shot projects? Especially games. this is so stupid

Seeing the results I don't see how the results are even comparable Opus is clearly far superior in most aspects. Smoothness, design, functionality etc.

At the end of the day, the time earned is more important then the cost for big players.

The ability to spawn 10 claude agents and rush a project to outcompete someone is more important for big businesses in my imo. Also the small details that GLM missed would take significant more time to iron out, considering it already took double the time.

I do hope other (open weight) models catch up, but to act like they are anywhere close for me is a bit disingenuous.