Directory · Model comparison
GLM-5.2 vs GPT-5.6 Luna
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 | GLM-5.2 | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| Input cost / 1M | $1.40 | $1.00 |
| Output cost / 1M | $4.40 | $6.00 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,050,000 tokens |
| MMLU score | — | — |
Cost verdict
Enter monthly input and output volumes to see total cost savings.
GLM-5.2
- Input: 1M × $1.40 = $1.40
- Output: 1M × $4.40 = $4.40
- Total
- $5.80
GPT-5.6 Luna
- Input: 1M × $1.00 = $1.00
- Output: 1M × $6.00 = $6.00
- Total
- $7.00
Total cost savings
$1.20
GLM-5.2 saves $1.20 per month vs the other model at this volume.
Model routing savings
Uses this page's verified rates. GPT-5.6 Luna is the premium route (higher combined per-1M cost); GLM-5.2 handles routine traffic.
All premium
GPT-5.6 Luna
$350.00
100% of input and output on the premium route
Routed stack
80% → GLM-5.2
20% → GPT-5.6 Luna
$302.00
- Routine slice
- $232.00
- Premium slice
- $70.00
Monthly savings
$48.00
13.7% lower
Rates pulled from this page's model database entries (gpt-5-6-luna, glm-5-2) — 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.