GLM 5.2 Open vs 
Gemini 3.5 Flash Paid
GLM 5.2 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Can the open-source model replace the paid one? Full 2026 breakdown.
Gemini 3.5 Flash — full profile ›
Prices & specs refreshed from live data · OpenSourceAI.tech
Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.
GLM 5.2 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash specs
| Spec | GLM 5.2 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Z.AI | |
| Type | Open-weight | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M tokens | 1M tokens |
| Input price | $0.78/M · free self-host | $1.5/M |
| Output price | $2.44/M · free self-host | $9/M |
| Vision / multimodal | No | Yes |
| Tool / function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No (API only) |
| License | MIT | Proprietary |
Feature comparison
| Capability | GLM 5.2 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Open weights (downloadable) | ✓ | ✗ |
| Self-hostable | ✓ | ✗ |
| Runs fully offline | ✓ | ✗ |
| Vision / multimodal | ✗ | ✓ |
| Tool / function calling | ✓ | ✓ |
| 1M+ context window | ✓ | ✓ |
Benchmarks: GLM 5.2 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).
Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.
How GLM 5.2 and Gemini 3.5 Flash score
| Criterion | GLM 5.2 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Cost-efficiency | 4.5 | 3.5 |
| Context window | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| Openness | 5.0 | 1.5 |
| Self-hosting | 5.0 | 1.0 |
| Multimodality | 3.5 | 5.0 |
Scores come from live data — output price (cost), context length, open vs closed weights (openness & self-hosting) and vision/tool support (multimodality). Raw task quality isn't scored here; it depends on your benchmark — see the verdict.
What each model is
GLM 5.2 Open
GLM 5.2 is a large-scale reasoning model from Z.ai. It supports text input and output with a 1M-token context window, and is suited for long-horizon agent workflows, project-level software engineering,...
Gemini 3.5 Flash Paid
Gemini 3.5 Flash is Google's high-efficiency multimodal model, bringing near-Pro level coding and reasoning at Flash-tier cost and speed. It is highly optimized for coding proficiency and parallel agentic execution...
Other models in these families
These variants are tracked but not compared here — one page per family keeps the comparison readable.
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM 5.2 as good as Gemini 3.5 Flash?
GLM 5.2 is open-weight and competitive on many tasks, but Gemini 3.5 Flash may still lead on the hardest reasoning and agentic work. The gap keeps narrowing — benchmark both on your actual use case before deciding.
Can I run GLM 5.2 locally?
Yes. GLM 5.2 has open weights, so you can self-host it on your own GPUs or run it via a low-cost API. Gemini 3.5 Flash is API-only and cannot be self-hosted.
How much cheaper is GLM 5.2?
GLM 5.2 costs $2.44/M output vs $9/M for Gemini 3.5 Flash — roughly 4x cheaper via API, and free if you self-host.
GLM 5.2 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash — which should I pick in 2026?
Choose GLM 5.2 if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose Gemini 3.5 Flash if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.
People also compare
Explore more open-source AI
Browse the full open-source model leaderboard, thousands of tools and live benchmarks — all in one place.
Open the leaderboard →