How did GLM-5.2 score against Claude Fable 5 on Kilo Code's planning benchmark?

Claude Fable 5 scored 9.1 and GLM-5.2 scored 9.0 on the same planning task with the same prompt and rubric. The gap is within the noise of a single-run evaluation. Both models made the same architectural decisions on fast SHA-256 hashing, unknown-flag caching, and keeping environment variables out of the rollout hash.

What was the one area where Fable 5 outperformed GLM-5.2?

Fable 5 explicitly spelled out a create-time cache trap in its plan. GLM-5.2 left the same constraint implicit. This was the single edge that pushed Fable's score ahead by 0.1 points.

How much cheaper is GLM-5.2 compared to Claude Fable 5?

GLM-5.2 lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens. Claude Fable 5 lists at $10 per million input tokens and $50 per million output tokens. GLM-5.2 is roughly one-tenth the price of Fable 5.

Does this mean GLM-5.2 plans as well as Fable 5 across all tasks?

No. This was one task, one run — not proof of parity across the board. But it is a strong signal that open-weight models are closing the planning gap, and at a price point that changes the economics of when to use a frontier model versus an affordable alternative for every task.

← Back to blog

explainx / blog

GLM-5.2 vs Claude Fable 5: Kilo Code's Planning Benchmark Shows a Near-Tie at 1/10th the Price

AI Models, Zhipu AI, GLM, Claude Fable 5, Anthropic, Benchmarks, Agentic Coding

GLM-5.2 vs Claude Fable 5 on Kilo Code planning benchmarks — near-tie at 1/10th the price. Comparison updated July 1 with Fable live again.

Jun 19, 2026·1 min read·Yash Thakker

add explainx.ai

go deep

GLM-5.2 vs Claude Fable 5: Kilo Code's Planning Benchmark Shows a Near-Tie at 1/10th the Price

A quick look at how GLM-5.2 goes toe-to-toe with Claude Fable 5 on planning.

Spotted something out of date? Let us know.

Aug 21, 2026

GLM-5.3 Max "2nd Among Open Code Models": What the Numbers Actually Show

A headline trending on AI news aggregators claims GLM-5.3 Max ranks 2nd among open code models and beats Gemini 3.7 Flash. We traced it against Artificial Analysis's Intelligence Index, Z.ai's own Code Bench, and BenchLM's coding leaderboard — the picture is real but more mixed than the headline suggests, and no single named leaderboard backs the "2nd" claim exactly as stated.

Aug 20, 2026

GLM-5.3 Ties Kimi K3 on the AA Intelligence Index — Without a New Base Model

Artificial Analysis's August 18, 2026 evaluation put GLM-5.3 at 60 on its Intelligence Index, tying Kimi K3 for the top open-weights score. The notable part isn't the tie — it's that Z.ai got there on the same 753B- parameter base model as GLM-5.2, with every point of the gain coming from post-training rather than a new pretraining run.

Aug 14, 2026

GLM-5.3 Is Live: "Built to Code. Ready for Cyber Defense." — Full Benchmarks

Z.ai's GLM-5.3 arrived August 14, 2026 with the tagline "Built to Code. Ready for Cyber Defense." It's live now through the GLM Coding Plan and ZCode, post-trained on a 743B parameter base model — but unlike GLM-5.2, open weights and API access are staged behind safety review, not shipped day one.

GLM-5.2 vs Claude Fable 5: Kilo Code's Planning Benchmark Shows a Near-Tie at 1/10th the Price

GLM-5.2 vs Claude Fable 5: Kilo Code's Planning Benchmark Shows a Near-Tie at 1/10th the Price

Related posts

GLM-5.3 Max "2nd Among Open Code Models": What the Numbers Actually Show

GLM-5.3 Ties Kimi K3 on the AA Intelligence Index — Without a New Base Model

GLM-5.3 Is Live: "Built to Code. Ready for Cyber Defense." — Full Benchmarks

Related posts

GLM-5.3 Max "2nd Among Open Code Models": What the Numbers Actually Show

GLM-5.3 Ties Kimi K3 on the AA Intelligence Index — Without a New Base Model

GLM-5.3 Is Live: "Built to Code. Ready for Cyber Defense." — Full Benchmarks