Compare DeepSeek-V4-Flash (DeepSeek) and GLM-5.2 (Z Ai) by price, context, capabilities, and latency.
Side by side
Compare price, provider, context, capabilities, latency, and source basis.
| Model | Provider | Input | Output | Context | Capabilities | Best for | Latency | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek-V4-Flashdeepseek/deepseek-v4-flash | DeepSeek | $0.14 / 1M tokens | $0.28 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeLong context | Chinese Q&A, general chat | 1679-6515ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| GLM-5.2z-ai/glm-5.2 | Z Ai | $1.18 / 1M tokens | $4.12 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeLong context | General chat via Z Ai, API workloads | 1210-2758ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
FAQ
DeepSeek-V4-Flash is cheaper ($0.14 / 1M tokens input / $0.28 / 1M tokens output) vs GLM-5.2 ($1.18 / 1M tokens input / $4.12 / 1M tokens output). Actual cost depends on your input/output token mix — estimate it with the pricing calculator.
Both offer the same context window: 1M tokens.
Both target Long context. Pick DeepSeek-V4-Flash to optimize cost, or DeepSeek-V4-Flash for the longer context window. Test both on real prompts before committing production traffic.