Is glm-5.2 genuine? Deep check result

Report ID MZZR20260709055218134D11Generated at 2026/07/09 13:52

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

Duration8 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 usage1.6MThe actual usage reported by the API; this page goes by it.Estimated usage1.7MEstimated from this test's requests.Deviation8% 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 rate73.1%

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 1M

All tested context tiers (32K / 64K / 100K / 200K / 400K / 800K / 1M) returned reliably.

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.

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 267 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 200 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 214 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 439 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 216 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 892 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 202 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 416 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 596 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 364 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 285 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 853 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 19.5K 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 59.5K 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 237.1K 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 474.0K tokens

1M 上下文能力实测

1M 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: 1M
This test used 611.8K tokens

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? Deep check result

Report ID:MZZR20260709055218134D11Generated at：2026/07/09 13:52

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

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

Duration8 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.

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 rate73.1%

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 1M

All tested context tiers (32K / 64K / 100K / 200K / 400K / 800K / 1M) returned reliably.

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 267 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 200 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 214 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 439 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 216 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 892 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 202 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 416 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 596 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 364 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 285 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 853 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 19.5K 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 59.5K 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 237.1K 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 474.0K tokens

1M 上下文能力实测

1M 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: 1M
This test used 611.8K tokens

Reviews

还没有人评论，来写第一条。