Is glm-5.2 genuine? Quick check result

Report ID MZZR20260708102752B4ADA2Generated at 2026/07/08 18:27

Highly matched

glm-5.2 本次快速验真结果：Highly matched（100/100）。本轮主要检测项均已Passed。

100Model consistency score

All primary checks passed in this run.

Tested byMozhenzhen

Tested modelGLM-5.2

ProvidersConeverse AI

Requests99

Duration2 min 19 sec

Identity verdictVerified

ReferenceMozhenzhen's own test standard

A newer test record is availableThis report preserves the result at the time of testing and remains valid as a record. You can also view the newer report。

Token usage check

Reported usage is used; estimates appear only when none is reported.

Reported usage962.5KThe actual usage reported by the API; this page goes by it.Estimated usage1.7MEstimated from this test's requests.Deviation43% belowThe reported usage is below the estimate, possibly because of how tokens are counted or compressed.Usage checkBelow the estimateFigures are as reported by the API; your bill is authoritative.

Token cache usage test

Several runs in a row to see whether repeated content is billed at the cheaper cache rate; 0% means no cache discount this time.

Total 5 request

Share billed at the cache rate72.8%

Low cache share

Caching was used, but only a little; check your bill to see how much it really saves.

Usage this run14.4KCached tokens10.5KNon-cached tokens3.9KAverage per run2.9K

Usage reportedReportedCache billingHappenedResultNormal

Cache share by testThis is only the cache share the endpoint reported; the real discount is on the bill

Long-context test

We test how much it can read at once, then compare that with the officially stated length.

7 tiers

Verified up to 800K

1M 需要关注，原因：接口服务异常。

Reference windowReference window 1MModel-center context window; available lengths may vary by provider.Tested context lengths32K / 64K / 100K / 200K / 400K / 800K / 1MTests begin at the longest generated context and step down to verify stable, correct responses.

Current guidance

The 1M tier did not return reliably this time; do not rely on this length.

Results for this test

Review API availability, model identity, response completeness, and other checks separately.

Scoring breakdown

Highly matched100/100

All primary checks passed in this run.

Can you call it, and is the model listed30 / 30

No deductions

Does the most basic call work25 / 25

No deductions

Is it the model it claims to be25 / 25

No deductions

Will it keep working20 / 20

No deductions

Test details

Expand any row for details; anything private has been removed.

11 checks

Model list visibility

glm-5.2 is visible in the API model list.

Passed

Test details

This test ran 85 times; result: Passed.

Basic call probe

The basic API call succeeded and returned a recognizable response.

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times; result: Passed.

Model self-identification

Asked the model to identify itself; all 1 responses matched the expected name.

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 333 tokens

连问 5 次，重复内容有没有按缓存价计费

针对这个模型再做一项专门检测。 5 次都对。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 5 times: 5 passed.
This test used 14.4K tokens
of which 10.5K tokens were billed at the cache price

32K 上下文能力实测

32K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 32K
This test used 19.6K tokens

64K 上下文能力实测

64K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 64K
This test used 38.9K tokens

100K 上下文能力实测

100K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 100K
This test used 59.4K tokens

200K 上下文能力实测

200K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 200K
This test used 118.7K tokens

400K 上下文能力实测

400K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 400K
This test used 237.2K tokens

800K 上下文能力实测

800K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 800K
This test used 473.9K tokens

1M 上下文能力实测

1M 长度的内容没能稳定读完，这次就记到这里为止。

Needs review

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 need attention.
Why it failed: API service error
Content length used: 1M

Reviews

还没有人评论，来写第一条。

发表评论

Before you buy AI, check Mozhenzhen

Scan to view reportOpen full report

Mozhenzhen verification report · Measured with real calls

Is glm-5.2 genuine? Quick check result

Report ID:MZZR20260708102752B4ADA2Generated at：2026/07/08 18:27

Provider details AI model details

A newer test record is availableThis report preserves the result at the time of testing and remains valid as a record. You can also view the newer report。

Model consistency score

Highly matched

glm-5.2 本次快速验真结果：Highly matched（100/100）。本轮主要检测项均已Passed。

Tested byMozhenzhen

Tested modelGLM-5.2

ProvidersConeverse AI

Requests99

Duration2 min

Identity verdictVerified

ReferenceMozhenzhen's own test standard

Token usage check

Reported usage is used; estimates appear only when none is reported.

Token cache usage test

Several runs in a row to see whether repeated content is billed at the cheaper cache rate; 0% means no cache discount this time.

Total 5 request

Share billed at the cache rate72.8%

Low cache share

Caching was used, but only a little; check your bill to see how much it really saves.

Usage this run14.4KCached tokens10.5KNon-cached tokens3.9KAverage per run2.9K

Usage reportedReportedCache billingHappenedResultNormal

Cache share by testThis is only the cache share the endpoint reported; the real discount is on the bill

Long-context test

We test how much it can read at once, then compare that with the officially stated length.

7 tiers

Verified up to 800K

1M 需要关注，原因：接口服务异常。

Current guidance

The 1M tier did not return reliably this time; do not rely on this length.

Results for this test

Review API availability, model identity, response completeness, and other checks separately.

Scoring breakdown

Highly matched100/100

All primary checks passed in this run.

Can you call it, and is the model listed30 / 30

No deductions

Does the most basic call work25 / 25

No deductions

Is it the model it claims to be25 / 25

No deductions

Will it keep working20 / 20

No deductions

Test details

Expand any row for details; anything private has been removed

11 checks

Model list visibility

glm-5.2 is visible in the API model list.

Passed

Test details

This test ran 85 times; result: Passed.

Basic call probe

The basic API call succeeded and returned a recognizable response.

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times; result: Passed.

Model self-identification

Asked the model to identify itself; all 1 responses matched the expected name.

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 333 tokens

连问 5 次，重复内容有没有按缓存价计费

针对这个模型再做一项专门检测。 5 次都对。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 5 times: 5 passed.
This test used 14.4K tokens
of which 10.5K tokens were billed at the cache price

32K 上下文能力实测

32K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 32K
This test used 19.6K tokens

64K 上下文能力实测

64K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 64K
This test used 38.9K tokens

100K 上下文能力实测

100K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 100K
This test used 59.4K tokens

200K 上下文能力实测

200K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 200K
This test used 118.7K tokens

400K 上下文能力实测

400K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 400K
This test used 237.2K tokens

800K 上下文能力实测

800K 长度的内容能稳定读完，这就是本次上下文实测的依据。

Passed

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
Content length used: 800K
This test used 473.9K tokens

1M 上下文能力实测

1M 长度的内容没能稳定读完，这次就记到这里为止。

Needs review

Test details

This test ran 1 times: 1 need attention.
Why it failed: API service error
Content length used: 1M

Reviews

还没有人评论，来写第一条。