Verification report details

Is glm-5.2 genuine? Deep check result

Report ID MZZR20260708104221F7D144Generated at 2026/07/08 18:42

Matched

glm-5.2 本次深度验真结果:Matched(88/100)。主要问题:这家的接口当时有故障。

88Model consistency score

主要问题:这家的接口当时有故障。

Tested byMozhenzhen
Tested modelGLM-5.2
ProvidersConeverse AI
Requests113
Duration5 min 1 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。

This call did not complete

Reason for failure

The provider’s API returned a service error at the time.

What to do

Try again later. Contact the provider if this persists.

Token usage check

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

Reported usage968.6KThe 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 rate54.4%
Low cache share

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

Usage this run14.5KCached tokens7.9KNon-cached tokens6.6KAverage 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
100%75%50%25%0第 1 次:缓存占比 0.0%,缓存 0 token,本次用量 2.9K token0.0%1times第 2 次:缓存占比 90.5%,缓存 2.6K token,本次用量 2.9K token90.5%2times第 3 次:缓存占比 91.3%,缓存 2.6K token,本次用量 2.9K token91.3%3times第 4 次:缓存占比 0.0%,缓存 0 token,本次用量 2.9K token0.0%4times第 5 次:缓存占比 91.1%,缓存 2.6K token,本次用量 2.9K token91.1%5times
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

Matched88/100

主要问题:这家的接口当时有故障。

Can you call it, and is the model listed10 / 10
No deductions
Does the API respond properly8 / 12
这家的接口当时有故障(逻辑网格推理) -4
Is it the model it claims to be18 / 18
No deductions
Does it answer like the official model25 / 25
No deductions
Is usage and billing reasonable10 / 10
No deductions
Will it keep working17 / 25
这家的接口当时有故障(逻辑网格推理) -8

Test details

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

24 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 297 tokens
指令跟随

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 175 tokens
JSON 结构

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 194 tokens
标签结构复述

按官方接口的标准调用,看返回是否规范。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 345 tokens
隐藏提示词边界

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 222 tokens
品牌边界

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 708 tokens
用量数据是否完整

核对它报回来的用量和缓存计费。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 260 tokens
逻辑网格推理

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 有几次没对上。

Needs review
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 need attention.
Why it failed: API service error
复测一致性

反复多问几次,看会不会答一半就断或偷偷换模型。 2 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 2 times: 2 passed.
This test used 378 tokens
GLM 系列边界

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 536 tokens
GLM 系列边界

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 1.6K tokens
模型代码锚定

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 344 tokens
Model-family test: series and tier 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 291 tokens
Deep model test: family-specific boundary

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 770 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 14.5K tokens
of which 7.9K 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 38.8K 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 59.6K 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 118.6K 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 237.1K 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 473.8K 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

MozhenzhenBefore you buy AI, check Mozhenzhen
Scan to view reportOpen full report
Mozhenzhen verification report · Measured with real calls

Is glm-5.2 genuine? Deep check result

Report ID:MZZR20260708104221F7D144Generated at:2026/07/08 18:42
Provider detailsAI 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

Matched

glm-5.2 本次深度验真结果:Matched(88/100)。主要问题:这家的接口当时有故障。

Tested byMozhenzhen
Tested modelGLM-5.2
ProvidersConeverse AI
Requests113
Duration5 min
Identity verdictVerified
ReferenceMozhenzhen's own test standard

This call did not complete

Reason for failure

The provider’s API returned a service error at the time.

What to do

Try again later. Contact the provider if this persists.

Token usage check

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

Reported usage968.6KThe 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 rate54.4%
Low cache share

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

Usage this run14.5KCached tokens7.9KNon-cached tokens6.6KAverage 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
100%75%50%25%0第 1 次:缓存占比 0.0%,缓存 0 token,本次用量 2.9K token0.0%1times第 2 次:缓存占比 90.5%,缓存 2.6K token,本次用量 2.9K token90.5%2times第 3 次:缓存占比 91.3%,缓存 2.6K token,本次用量 2.9K token91.3%3times第 4 次:缓存占比 0.0%,缓存 0 token,本次用量 2.9K token0.0%4times第 5 次:缓存占比 91.1%,缓存 2.6K token,本次用量 2.9K token91.1%5times
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

Matched88/100

主要问题:这家的接口当时有故障。

Can you call it, and is the model listed10 / 10
No deductions
Does the API respond properly8 / 12
这家的接口当时有故障(逻辑网格推理) -4
Is it the model it claims to be18 / 18
No deductions
Does it answer like the official model25 / 25
No deductions
Is usage and billing reasonable10 / 10
No deductions
Will it keep working17 / 25
这家的接口当时有故障(逻辑网格推理) -8

Test details

Expand any row for details; anything private has been removed

24 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 297 tokens
指令跟随

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 175 tokens
JSON 结构

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 194 tokens
标签结构复述

按官方接口的标准调用,看返回是否规范。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 345 tokens
隐藏提示词边界

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 222 tokens
品牌边界

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 708 tokens
用量数据是否完整

核对它报回来的用量和缓存计费。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 260 tokens
逻辑网格推理

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 有几次没对上。

Needs review
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 need attention.
Why it failed: API service error
复测一致性

反复多问几次,看会不会答一半就断或偷偷换模型。 2 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 2 times: 2 passed.
This test used 378 tokens
GLM 系列边界

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 536 tokens
GLM 系列边界

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 1.6K tokens
模型代码锚定

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 344 tokens
Model-family test: series and tier 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 291 tokens
Deep model test: family-specific boundary

用几道题看它的回答水平像不像官方模型。 1 次都对。

Passed
Test details
This test ran 1 times: 1 passed.
This test used 770 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 14.5K tokens
of which 7.9K 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 38.8K 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 59.6K 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 118.6K 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 237.1K 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 473.8K 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