GLM 5.2 vs Sonnet 5: same agency website prompt, a big gap in motion and price

CC

Command Code

@CommandCodeAI

We ran a test comparing GLM 5.2 vs Sonnet 5. We used the same prompt, with /design in the command code....

4:57 PM·Jul 1, 2026

Same prompt, two models, one shot each with /design in Command Code.

The prompt

Create a modern single-page website for a creative digital studio called ECHO Studio. Dark cinematic aesthetic with bold typography, custom cursor, preloader, hero section with the line "We craft echoes that last", horizontal scrolling project gallery, services list, about section with stats, and a contact section. Include smooth animations and a high-end Awwwards-style feel.

What we found

We ran a test comparing GLM 5.2 vs Sonnet 5.

We used the same prompt, with /design in the command code.

The difference is big - effects, motion, and especially the footer. Sonnet 5 had nice hover effects, but didn't come close to GLM 5.2

GLM 5.2 wins on quality and pricing.

The gap wasn't subtle. On a brief that specifically asks for a "high-end Awwwards-style feel" - motion, a custom cursor, a preloader, horizontal scroll - GLM 5.2 delivered noticeably more of that texture than Sonnet 5, whose hover effects were solid but didn't close the distance. And GLM 5.2 did it at a lower per-token cost than a frontier Claude model, which is the pattern this whole benchmark series keeps turning up: the cheaper model isn't automatically the weaker one on a design-heavy brief.

Try this yourself

Swap /model sonnet-5 to compare. Full command reference: commandcode.ai/docs/slash-commands/design. More one-shot comparisons: CommandCodeAI/slash-design-showcase.