Compare GLM 5.2 from Z.ai and Claude Fable 5 from Anthropic on key metrics including benchmarks, price, context length, and other model features. Access both models and hundreds of others through the OpenRouter API.
| Attribute | GLM 5.2 | Claude Fable 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.006/M tokens | $10/M tokens |
| Output price | $6.80/M tokens | $50/M tokens |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Intelligence Index | Not available | Not available |
| Coding Index | 68.8 | 76.5 |
| Agentic Index | 38.4 | 50.7 |
| Latency (p50) | 0.44 s | 3.45 s |
| Throughput (p50) | 128.0 tok/s | 57.0 tok/s |
| Provided by | Z.ai | Anthropic |
| Model page | GLM 5.2 model details, providers and pricing | Claude Fable 5 model details, providers and pricing |
Benchmark data updated
GLM 5.2 is cheaper than Claude Fable 5 on OpenRouter: GLM 5.2 costs $0.006/M tokens input and $6.80/M tokens output, while Claude Fable 5 costs $10/M tokens input and $50/M tokens output.
GLM 5.2 has the longer context window at 1,048,576 tokens, compared with 1,000,000 tokens for Claude Fable 5.
GLM 5.2 is faster on OpenRouter, generating a median 128.0 tokens per second compared with 57.0 tokens per second for Claude Fable 5.
Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding, with an Artificial Analysis Coding Index of 76.5 compared with 68.8 for GLM 5.2.