PeerLM logoPeerLM
All Comparisons

Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 vs Z.ai: GLM 5: Coding Performance with 10 Evaluators

In our latest evaluation of Coding Performance with 10 Evaluators, we compare the output quality and efficiency of Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 and Z.ai: GLM 5.

Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512

1.5

preference score

vs

Z.ai: GLM 5

8.5

preference score

Judges ranked the responses in this Run against each other; the rank is mapped onto a 0–10 scale. It shows which response was preferred, not how good either one is — and it is not a percentage, a pass rate, or a check that the output was correct.

Sample size for this comparison was not recorded. Treat it as directional.

Evidence clarification: this article predates recorded sample provenance. Treat its conclusions as claims about the displayed examples; they do not establish general model superiority, verified correctness, or production suitability.

Key Findings

Top PerformerZ.ai: GLM 5

Ranked #1 in Coding Performance with 10 Evaluators with a score of 8.46.

AccuracyZ.ai: GLM 5

Demonstrated significantly higher precision in code generation and logic.

Cost-EfficiencyMistral: Mistral Large 3 2512

Offers a much lower total cost per request for lighter coding tasks.

Specifications

SpecMistral: Mistral Large 3 2512Z.ai: GLM 5
Providermistralaiz-ai
Context Length262K205K
Input Price (per 1M tokens)$0.50$0.60
Output Price (per 1M tokens)$1.50$1.92
Max Output Tokens209,715128,000
Tierstandardstandard

Our Verdict

Z.ai: GLM 5 is the dominant model for coding performance, significantly outperforming Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 in both accuracy and instruction adherence. While Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 provides a more budget-friendly option, the performance gap in complex coding tasks makes Z.ai: GLM 5 the preferred choice for mission-critical software development.

Overview

Choosing the right Large Language Model for software engineering tasks is critical for productivity and codebase integrity. In this report, we analyze the performance of two prominent models: Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 and Z.ai: GLM 5. Through our rigorous PeerLM evaluation framework, titled "Coding Performance with 10 Evaluators," we have assessed their ability to handle complex programming tasks, instruction adherence, and overall output accuracy.

Benchmark Results

The comparative evaluation highlights a significant performance gap between the two contenders. Z.ai: GLM 5 has demonstrated superior capability in coding scenarios, securing the top rank in our leaderboard.

ModelOverall ScoreAccuracyInstruction Following
Z.ai: GLM 58.468.468.46
Mistral: Mistral Large 3 25121.541.541.54

Criteria Breakdown

The evaluation focused on two primary pillars of coding proficiency: Accuracy and Instruction Following. By utilizing a comparative ranking method, our 10 evaluators assessed how each model handled code generation, debugging, and logic implementation.

  • Accuracy: Z.ai: GLM 5 consistently provided more syntactically correct and logically sound code snippets compared to Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512.
  • Instruction Following: When presented with complex constraints, Z.ai: GLM 5 maintained alignment with the prompt requirements, whereas Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 struggled to meet the specific criteria set by the evaluators.

Cost & Latency

Understanding the economic trade-offs is essential for scaling development workflows. While Z.ai: GLM 5 leads in performance, it operates at a different price point than Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512.

ModelTotal Cost (USD)Cost per Output TokenAvg Completion Tokens
Z.ai: GLM 5$0.009623$0.002465976
Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512$0.001428$0.002164165

Use Cases

The choice between these models depends on your project requirements. Z.ai: GLM 5 is the clear choice for high-stakes coding tasks, such as building complex backend logic, refactoring legacy code, or implementing new features where accuracy is non-negotiable. Conversely, Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 may serve as a cost-effective alternative for simpler boilerplate generation or tasks where the developer is performing heavy oversight and quick iteration.

Verdict

When evaluating Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 vs Z.ai: GLM 5, the data clearly favors Z.ai: GLM 5 for professional coding applications. With an overall score of 8.46 against 1.54, Z.ai: GLM 5 proves to be the more reliable partner for technical tasks, despite the higher cost profile.

Backed by real data

View the Full Evaluation Report

See every response, score, and evaluator judgment behind this comparison. All data from PeerLM's blind evaluation pipeline.

View Report

Run your own Monitor

Compare Mistral: Mistral Large 3 2512 and Z.ai: GLM 5 on sampled production prompts, with frozen criteria and inspectable evidence.

Start a Monitor

Get a free managed report

We'll run a full evaluation with your real prompts and deliver a detailed recommendation. Free for qualified teams.

Request Report

Methodology

Evaluated using PeerLM's blind evaluation pipeline with 4 responses per model across 2 criteria.