AI Trend Notifier
EN

$ diff muse-spark-1-2 glm-5-2

Muse Spark 1.2 vs GLM-5.2

Values come from Muse Spark 1.2 and GLM-5.2, where each is cited to its source. This page states no benchmark result and ranks neither model — it puts two published specifications next to each other. Where a lab has not published a figure, the row says so rather than guessing.

What actually differs

Context window
Identical — both accept 1M tokens, so context length is not a reason to pick either.
Input price
Muse Spark 1.2 at $1.25/M against $1.4/M — 1.1× cheaper to feed. Standard rates: one of these labs also quotes a lower cached-input tier, which applies only when a prefix is reused — see the full spec below.
Output price
Muse Spark 1.2 at $4.25/M against $4.4/M — 1.0× cheaper to generate. Output dominates the bill on most agentic workloads, where the model writes far more than it reads.
Recency
Muse Spark 1.2 shipped 53 days after GLM-5.2 (2026-08-05 vs 2026-06-13).

Full spec

AttributeMuse Spark 1.2GLM-5.2
DeveloperMeta AIZ.ai
Released2026-08-052026-06-13
Context window1,000,0001,000,000 tokens
Pricing$1.25/M input · $4.25/M output · $0.15/M cached input$1.40/M input · $4.40/M output — Z.ai's own endpoint on the OpenRouter catalogue, read 2026-08-01. Earlier revisions of this row quoted ≈$0.62–$0.77, which was not a price change: OpenRouter serves this model from 33 providers between $0.72 and $2.31 on input, and `/models` reports whichever one is routing at that instant. Four alerts in a day named $0.97, $1.19, $1.12 and $0.76 — Alibaba, SiliconFlow, an intermediate route, and StreamLake. Reseller quotes are real prices but they are not this model's price; quote the first-party figure, or quote a reseller with its name attached.
Licensenot recordedMIT (unrestricted, "no regional limits")
AvailabilityMuse Code (beta, macOS + Linux), Meta Model APIGLM Coding Plan (highest subscription tier), standalone API, open weights, NVIDIA NIM hosted

How these pages are produced

← all comparisons