
Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot
GLM-5.2 vs Hy3
The never-forgets agent — 1M context, open weights. vs Tencent's open-weights coder — Apache-2.0, cheap, beats GLM-5.1 on frontend in Tencent's blind eval.
Head-to-head verdict: GLM-5.2 wins 6–0 with 1 tie.
What I tested — same prompt, two models
I run the same fixed prompt set through every new model the day it drops — same string, one shot, single HTML file out — and I score the result 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. Below is what came out when I gave the exact same prompts to GLM-5.2 and Hy3, side by side, on 7 shared tasks inside the Agent Operating System.
Both models were given identical prompts inside the Agent Operating System — no help, no iteration, no "best of N" tricks. I run each prompt once, save the HTML file the model produces, and score it 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The scoring is mine. The verdicts below are pulled from my source comparison guides at agentos.guide where I publish every score and the reasoning behind it.
GLM-5.2 · Default model inside Agent OS for any task that touches a long context — codebase Q&A, multi-file refactors, agent memory replay.
Hy3 · Wired into the Agent OS as the 'Hy3 Coder' tab (chat + live preview + workspace) via OpenRouter. Bench built one-shot on the same prompts as the field; weak builds iterated by Hy3 itself (the model fixes its own builds).
Side-by-side on 47 shared tasks
Click any cell to play that model's actual one-shot attempt. Medals are derived from my 0–10 scores per task (highest = 🥇, second = 🥈, third = 🥉).
Task ↓
GLM-5.2
Hy3
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Page
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Where GLM-5.2 beat Hy3
The tasks where I gave GLM-5.2 a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Doom
Game
GLM-5.2 8.0
·
Hy3 5.5
(+2.5)
What I saw: All three are real, playable shooters. Opus drops you in a corridor with an imp dead ahead — gun, crosshair and HUD framed like a screenshot. Kimi matches it: a monster down a textured hall, health, ammo, minimap. GLM ships a gorgeous 'HAZARD PROTOCOL' title screen with a working…
Gtadrive
Game
GLM-5.2 8.0
·
Hy3 7.4
(+0.6)
What I saw: 47KB · plays clean · three, webgl
Dragonrealm
Game
GLM-5.2 7.5
·
Hy3 7.2
(+0.3)
What I saw: 142KB · plays clean · plain
Gtafoot
Game
GLM-5.2 7.5
·
Hy3 7.2
(+0.3)
What I saw: 43KB · plays clean · plain (re-rolled)
Parachute
Game
GLM-5.2 7.5
·
Hy3 7.2
(+0.3)
What I saw: 32KB · plays clean · plain
Strengths & weaknesses I logged
GLM-5.2
Strengths
- 1M-token context window — best-in-class long-document and large-codebase work
- Open weights — runs locally, no vendor lock-in, no token meter
- Top of the bench for cinematic visuals (neon city, synthwave, voxel runner)
Trade-offs
- Faceplanted on the Goldie Bench raycaster — the engine was great but it spawned the player inside a wall
- First-shot reliability lags Opus by a hair on consistency
Hy3
Strengths
- Apache-2.0 open weights — self-host free, no lock-in
- Tencent's 270-expert blind eval: 2.67/4 vs GLM-5.1's 2.51, strongest on frontend / data / CI-CD
- Hallucination rate cut 12.5% → 5.4%; stable tool-calls across scaffoldings (<4% SWE-Bench variance)
Trade-offs
- Slow upstream on OpenRouter (30-90s per build) — fine for one-shots, sluggish for tight loops
- One-shot game builds can under-render (flat raycaster walls, unlit 3D) without an iterate pass
Pricing & context — the spec sheet
| Spec | GLM-5.2 | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Zhipu / Z.ai | Tencent Hunyuan |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 262,144-token context window. Open weights (Apache-2.0) on HuggingFace / ModelScope / GitHub; benched here via OpenRouter. |
| Price | Open weights · free for individuals | $0.14 / 1M input · $0.58 / 1M output |
| Pricing detail | Open-weights release: weights downloadable from Hugging Face for self-hosting, or runnable for free on z.ai for individuals (commercial use has separate licensing). | Tencent Hunyuan 3 — open-weights under Apache-2.0, so free to self-host. On OpenRouter it is one of the cheapest capable coders: ~$0.14/M in, $0.58/M out (1 RMB / 4 RMB). Upstream can be slow (30-90s to first token), but per-token cost is negligible. |
| Release | 2026-06-14 | 2026-07-06 |
| Bench coverage | 47/47 scored · avg 7.77/10 | 7/7 scored · avg 7.13/10 |
The verdict — which should you pick?
Across 7 scored shared tasks, GLM-5.2 averaged 7.71/10, beating Hy3's 7.13/10 by 0.59 points. Pick GLM-5.2 when the build has to ship on the first prompt and you can afford the trade-offs in the comparison below.
If you only run one of these inside your stack, the head-to-head average above is the call. If you can run both, my honest play is to wire GLM-5.2 and Hy3 both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — long-context agent loops — pasting a whole codebase into one prompt → GLM-5.2, cost-sensitive coding + frontend design where open weights matter → Hy3. That's the same setup I run for the 3,600+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
FAQ — GLM-5.2 vs Hy3
Which is better, GLM-5.2 or Hy3?
On Goldie Bench, GLM-5.2 averages 7.71/10 across the shared tasks, with 5 gold, 4 silver, 1 bronze overall. Hy3 averages 7.13/10, with 0 gold, 1 silver, 0 bronze. GLM-5.2 wins the head-to-head 6–0.
How much does GLM-5.2 cost vs Hy3?
GLM-5.2: Open-weights release: weights downloadable from Hugging Face for self-hosting, or runnable for free on z.ai for individuals (commercial use has separate licensing). Hy3: Tencent Hunyuan 3 — open-weights under Apache-2.0, so free to self-host. On OpenRouter it is one of the cheapest capable coders: ~$0.14/M in, $0.58/M out (1 RMB / 4 RMB). Upstream can be slow (30-90s to first token), but per-token cost is negligible.
What's the context window for GLM-5.2 vs Hy3?
GLM-5.2 has a 1,000,000 tokens context window. Hy3 has a 262,144-token context window. Open weights (Apache-2.0) on HuggingFace / ModelScope / GitHub; benched here via OpenRouter. context window.
When should I pick GLM-5.2 over Hy3?
Pick GLM-5.2 for: Long-context agent loops — pasting a whole codebase into one prompt; Cinematic visual builds — landing pages, voxel scenes, synthwave runners; Anyone who needs to run a frontier coder locally for $0. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Faceplanted on the {{SITE_NAME}} raycaster — the engine was great but it spawned the player inside a wall; First-shot reliability lags Opus by a hair on consistency.
When should I pick Hy3 over GLM-5.2?
Pick Hy3 for: Cost-sensitive coding + frontend design where open weights matter; Self-hosters who want an Apache-2.0 model they fully own; Anyone wiring a cheap capable coder into a live build panel (Agent OS Hy3 Coder tab). The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Slow upstream on OpenRouter (30-90s per build) — fine for one-shots, sluggish for tight loops; One-shot game builds can under-render (flat raycaster walls, unlit 3D) without an iterate pass.
How does Goldie Bench score GLM-5.2 vs Hy3?
Every demo on this page was built by Julian Goldie inside the Agent Operating System — same fixed prompt for both models, one shot, single HTML file out. Each result gets a 0–10 score on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The highest score on each task gets gold; second gets silver; third gets bronze. See methodology for full provenance.
Related comparisons
Other head-to-heads using the same scoring system:
GLM-5.2 vs Fusion Hy3 vs Fusion GLM-5.2 vs Hermes MoA Hy3 vs Hermes MoA GLM-5.2 vs Claude Fable 5 Hy3 vs Claude Fable 5 GLM-5.2 vs Grok Hy3 vs GrokFull model pages: GLM-5.2 · Hy3 · back to the leaderboard
The same stack Julian uses
Run this stack yourself.
Every demo on this bench was built inside the Agent Operating System — one prompt, one shot, single HTML file out. The Agent OS, the prompts, the templates, the weekly walkthroughs and 3,600+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
3,600+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$59/momonthly





























