GLM-5.2 vs Llama 4 Scout
Detailed comparison of API pricing, technical specifications, and benchmark scores. Updated 2026-07-14.
Cost at a Glance
GLM-5.2 is 14.4× more expensive than Llama 4 Scout — switching could save 93% on your monthly API bill.
At 5M input + 2M output tokens per month:
Choosing Llama 4 Scout could save you $14.70/mo
Price Comparison (per 1M tokens)
| Metric | GLM-5.2 | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Input (per 1M tokens) | $1.40 | $0.10 |
| Output (per 1M tokens) | $4.40 | $0.30 |
| Cache Write (per 1M tokens) | — | — |
| Cache Read (per 1M tokens) | $0.26 | — |
| Batch Input (per 1M tokens) | — | — |
| Batch Output (per 1M tokens) | — | — |
Prices are per 1 million tokens. Actual costs depend on your monthly token volume. Use the calculator →
Specifications
| Spec | GLM-5.2 | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1M | 10M |
| Max Output Tokens | 128K | 16K |
| Knowledge Cutoff | 2026-06 | 2025-04 |
| Modalities | Text | Text, Image |
| Prompt Caching | Yes | No |
| Batch API | No | No |
| Thinking / Reasoning | Yes | No |
Benchmark Scores
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 62.1 | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.0 | 74.3 |
| HumanEval | 97.0 | 32.8 |
Benchmark scores from official provider reports. Higher is better. Missing scores indicate the provider has not published that benchmark yet.
Use Cases
GLM-5.2
Llama 4 Scout
About the Providers
GLM-5.2 is developed by Zhipu AI. Llama 4 Scout is developed by Meta. This is a cross-provider comparison between Zhipu AI and Meta models. For the most up-to-date pricing, always check the official API documentation from each provider.