Directory · Model comparison
DeepSeek-V4-Flash vs GLM-5.2
Side-by-side API economics and benchmarks. Per-1M input and output rates, context window, and verified metrics.
Tale of the tape
Head-to-head specs pulled from each model profile.
| Metric | DeepSeek-V4-Flash | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Input cost / 1M | $0.14 | $1.40 |
| Output cost / 1M | $0.28 | $4.40 |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| MMLU score | — | — |
Cost verdict
Enter monthly input and output volumes to see total cost savings.
DeepSeek-V4-Flash
- Input: 1M × $0.14 = $0.14
- Output: 1M × $0.28 = $0.28
- Total
- $0.42
GLM-5.2
- Input: 1M × $1.40 = $1.40
- Output: 1M × $4.40 = $4.40
- Total
- $5.80
Total cost savings
$5.38
DeepSeek-V4-Flash saves $5.38 per month vs the other model at this volume.
Model routing savings
Uses this page's verified rates. GLM-5.2 is the premium route (higher combined per-1M cost); DeepSeek-V4-Flash handles routine traffic.
All premium
GLM-5.2
$290.00
100% of input and output on the premium route
Routed stack
80% → DeepSeek-V4-Flash
20% → GLM-5.2
$74.80
- Routine slice
- $16.80
- Premium slice
- $58.00
Monthly savings
$215.20
74.2% lower
Rates pulled from this page's model database entries (glm-5-2, deepseek-v4-flash) — same per-1M input/output figures as Tale of the tape. Production routing needs quality gates and monitoring.
Related comparisons
More head-to-head model matchups.