// head_to_head

Ox Alpha vs GLM 5.2

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

GLM 5.2 scores higher, Ox Alpha costs less — it depends on your workload.

GLM 5.2 is ahead by 3.9 points overall, and Ox Alpha lists at a lower blended price. Whether 3.9 points is worth that depends on how much a wrong answer costs you. Ox Alpha also leads on measured cost per point of capability, at $0.0000 per point.

stealth

Ox Alpha

Blended / 1M
Free
Context
1.0M
Released
Aug 20, 2026
Overall score
69.2
reasoningtool callingimage inputvideo input

z-ai

GLM 5.2

Blended / 1M
$1.48
Context
1.0M
Released
Jun 16, 2026
Overall score
73.2
reasoningtool callingprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricOx AlphaGLM 5.2
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

69.273.2win
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.0000win$0.1260
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

Freewin$1.48
Input price / 1MFreewin$0.966
Output price / 1MFreewin$3.04
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.193
Context window1.0M1.0M
Max output tokens131K131K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — Ox Alpha on top, GLM 5.2 below, both out of 100.

Agentic codingtoo close to call
52.6
51.8
Coding
75.8
79.7
Reasoning
76.6
78.6
Mathematics
77.5
89.8
Data analysis
75.8
73.7
Language
66.1
76.2
Instruction following
60.3
62.3

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadOx AlphaGLM 5.2
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$0/mo$419.08/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$0/mo$645.84/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$0/mo$582.91/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$0/mo$1155.06/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$0/mo$2332.20/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You are running this at volume

Ox Alpha

Lowest measured cost per point of capability at $0.0000 per point — the gap compounds with every request.

Quality matters more than the bill

GLM 5.2

Highest overall LiveBench score of the two at 73.2.

Ox Alpha vs GLM 5.2 FAQ

Which is better, Ox Alpha or GLM 5.2?

GLM 5.2 scores higher, Ox Alpha costs less — it depends on your workload. GLM 5.2 is ahead by 3.9 points overall, and Ox Alpha lists at a lower blended price. Whether 3.9 points is worth that depends on how much a wrong answer costs you. Ox Alpha also leads on measured cost per point of capability, at $0.0000 per point.

Is Ox Alpha cheaper than GLM 5.2?

Ox Alpha is cheaper. On a 3:1 input:output blend, Ox Alpha lists at Free per million tokens and GLM 5.2 at $1.48. Input and output are priced separately — Ox Alpha charges Free in and Free out, GLM 5.2 charges $0.966 and $3.04 — so the model that looks cheaper flips depending on how output-heavy your workload is.

Ox Alpha vs GLM 5.2: which scores higher on benchmarks?

Ox Alpha scores 69.2 and GLM 5.2 scores 73.2 overall on LiveBench, the mean of its seven categories. That is a 3.9-point lead for GLM 5.2. Category scores differ from the overall figure — a model can lead on reasoning and trail on coding, which the per-category table above breaks out.

Which gives better value for money, Ox Alpha or GLM 5.2?

Ox Alpha. Cost per point divides the measured dollars LiveBench spent running the benchmark by the score it earned, so it captures something token pricing misses: a reasoning model can emit many times more tokens than its per-token rate suggests. Ox Alpha works out at $0.0000 per point and GLM 5.2 at $0.1260.

Does Ox Alpha or GLM 5.2 have a bigger context window?

They are effectively the same — 1.0M for Ox Alpha and 1.0M for GLM 5.2.

Do Ox Alpha and GLM 5.2 support prompt caching?

GLM 5.2 publishes a cached-input rate of $0.193 per million tokens against a full input rate of $0.966. The catalogue lists no separate cached rate for Ox Alpha, which means the provider does not price it separately here — not that caching is unavailable.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.