Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 vs GLM-5.2
Compare Claude Opus 4.7 vs GLM-5.2 API pricing: input/output token costs, cache pricing, context windows, workload estimates, and routing fit.
Claude Opus 4.7
anthropic · claude-opus-4-7
- Input
- $5
- Output
- $25
- Context
- 1M
GLM-5.2
zai · glm-5.2
- Input
- $1.4
- Output
- $4.4
- Context
- 1M
Quick take
GLM-5.2 has the lower input price at $1.4 per 1M input tokens. GLM-5.2 is cheaper for the example blended workload below. Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger context window at 1M tokens.
Choose Claude Opus 4.7 if...
- Claude Opus 4.7 is required if images, screenshots, or visual documents are part of the workflow.
Choose GLM-5.2 if...
- GLM-5.2 is the better default for cost-sensitive traffic and repeated high-volume calls.
Example workload cost
Estimates use input tokens plus 20% output tokens. They exclude provider discounts, cache hits, and tool/search surcharges.
| Workload | Claude Opus 4.7 | GLM-5.2 | Cheaper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1M input + 200K output | $10.00 | $2.28 | GLM-5.2 |
| 10M input + 2M output | $100.00 | $22.80 | GLM-5.2 |
| 100M input + 20M output | $1,000.00 | $228.00 | GLM-5.2 |
Context, output, and capability fit
Claude Opus 4.7 provides the larger context window. Check max output separately when the task needs long reports, code generation, or full-document rewrites.
- Claude Opus 4.7 max output
- 128K
- GLM-5.2 max output
- 128K
- Claude Opus 4.7 features
- prompt caching, function calling, vision
- GLM-5.2 features
- prompt caching, function calling
Risk notes for Claude Opus 4.7
- High output price: cap max tokens for verbose generation workloads.
Risk notes for GLM-5.2
- No major capability risk is flagged in this snapshot, but provider pages should still be verified before production routing.
Routing tags
frontierpremiumreasoningcodingagentslong-contextmultimodalcache-friendlyragopen-weightlocal-open