Model comparison

GLM 5.2 vs Claude Fable Latest

Compare Z.ai: GLM 5.2 (OpenRouter) and Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest (OpenRouter) by price, context, capabilities, and latency.

Which should you pick?

  • Price: Z.ai: GLM 5.2 is cheaper ($0.226 / 1M tokens input / $0.773 / 1M tokens output) vs Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest ($1.88 / 1M tokens input / $9.40 / 1M tokens output).
  • Context: Z.ai: GLM 5.2 has the larger context window (1M tokens).
  • Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest adds: Vision.

Side by side

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 vs Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest — full comparison

Compare price, provider, context, capabilities, latency, and source basis.

ModelProviderInputOutputContextCapabilitiesBest forLatencyStatusSource
Z.ai: GLM 5.2z-ai/glm-5.2OpenRouter$0.226 / 1M tokens$0.773 / 1M tokens1M
StreamingTool callingJSON modeLong context
General chat via OpenRouter, API workloads1000-3000msCatalogPlatform curated
Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest~anthropic/claude-fable-latestOpenRouter$1.88 / 1M tokens$9.40 / 1M tokens1M
StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision
image understanding, multimodal chat1000-3000msCatalogPlatform curated

FAQ

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 vs Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest FAQ

Is Z.ai: GLM 5.2 or Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest cheaper?

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 is cheaper ($0.226 / 1M tokens input / $0.773 / 1M tokens output) vs Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest ($1.88 / 1M tokens input / $9.40 / 1M tokens output). Actual cost depends on your input/output token mix — estimate it with the pricing calculator.

Which has a larger context window, Z.ai: GLM 5.2 or Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest?

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 is larger (1M tokens) vs 1M tokens.

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 vs Anthropic: Claude Fable Latest for Long context: which should I pick?

Both target Long context. Pick Z.ai: GLM 5.2 to optimize cost, or Z.ai: GLM 5.2 for the longer context window. Test both on real prompts before committing production traffic.