Free to start

Recraft V4.1 Utility vs Z.ai: GLM 5.2

Try both on us. Starter credit covers your first requests, then one key routes Recraft V4.1 Utility and GLM 5.2. Switch by changing the model name.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 has more Credits provider routes. A published Credits price comparison is not available for both models. There is not enough recent probe data to compare speed.

selected routeRecraft V4.1 Utility cheapest route

$2.2999/1MZ.ai: GLM 5.2 cheapest route

not enough dataRecraft V4.1 Utility fastest measured p50 TTFT

943 msZ.ai: GLM 5.2 fastest measured p50 TTFT via friendli

The price comparison adds each route's rate for one million input tokens and one million output tokens; your cost depends on your input/output mix. Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

Recraft V4.1 UtilityZ.ai: GLM 5.2

Model idrecraft/recraftv4_1_utilityz-ai/glm-5.2

Publisher Recraft Z.AI

AI IQ — IQ 118#48

Context0 tokens1,048,576 tokens

Credits provider routes132

Cheapest routeselected route$2.2999/1M

Cached inputNot published$0.131875/1M to $0.84611/1M

Privacy postureprovider posture varieshas Confidential route (E2EE + ZDR)

Fastest measured p50 TTFTnot enough data943 ms via friendli

Highest measured throughputnot enough data187 tok/s via venice

Recent route uptime rangenot enough data50.00% to 100.00%

Modes chat

Recraft V4.1 Utility routes

Overview1 Credits routes

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 routes

Overview32 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
BenchmarksTrustedRouter and external sources
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.365 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 5.2 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash64 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.260 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.258 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Z.ai: GLM 5.256 combined provider routes
OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b vs Z.ai: GLM 5.256 combined provider routes
Qwen: Qwen3.8 27B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.251 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.249 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

Questions

Which should I use, Recraft V4.1 Utility or Z.ai: GLM 5.2?

Z.ai: GLM 5.2 has more Credits provider routes. A published Credits price comparison is not available for both models. There is not enough recent probe data to compare speed.

Is Recraft V4.1 Utility or Z.ai: GLM 5.2 cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is selected route for Recraft V4.1 Utility and $2.2999/1M for Z.ai: GLM 5.2. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Recraft V4.1 Utility or Z.ai: GLM 5.2 faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is not enough data for Recraft V4.1 Utility and 943 ms for Z.ai: GLM 5.2. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test Recraft V4.1 Utility and Z.ai: GLM 5.2 with the same API?

Both use the same TrustedRouter base URL and API key. At least one of them is not a chat model, so the request can differ as well as the model id: the API docs list the route for each kind of model.