The flagship launch that caps the summer wave. DeepSeek V4 Pro is a 1.6-trillion-parameter Mixture-of-Experts model with 49 billion active parameters per token, a 1-million-token context window, and up to 384,000 output tokens across three reasoning modes (standard, high-effort, max-effort) . On Terminal-Bench 2.1, it scored 87.9 — a 15.8% improvement over the April preview — and performs at a level comparable to Claude Fable 5 at roughly 1/57th the cost . Reuters reports the model "closing in on — and in some tests surpassing — Claude Fable 5" on agent and software engineering benchmarks .
Pricing is $0.435 per million input tokens, $0.87 per million output tokens at standard rates, with cache discounts up to 97% . In max-effort reasoning mode, pricing is $1.32/$3.96 per million tokens .
Moonshot AI released what it calls the "world's first open model in the 3-trillion-parameter class" — a 2.8-trillion-parameter Mixture-of-Experts model that activates 16 of 896 experts per token, with a 1-million-token context window and native multimodal (vision + text) capabilities . Full weights were released on Hugging Face on July 27 under a Modified MIT license . It is live on Kimi.com, Kimi Work, Kimi Code, and the Kimi API .
The model that started the wave. GLM-5.2 is a 744-billion-parameter MoE with about 40 billion active per token, a 1-million-token context window, and an MIT license . NIST's CAISI assessment rates its overall capabilities as similar to GPT-5.2 (December 2025) and its cyber capabilities as similar to Claude Opus . It scores 81.0 on Terminal-Bench 2.1 and 62.1 on SWE-bench Pro — the top open-weight score on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index . Pricing is roughly 10x cheaper than Claude or GPT-5 at API .
A 1.6-trillion-parameter MoE (48 billion active per token) with a 1-million-token context window, released under an MIT license . Its critical distinction: the first trillion-parameter model trained and run entirely on domestic Chinese chips — a 50,000-chip cluster of Huawei Ascend 910B/C . By Meituan's testing, it edges past GPT-5.5 on software-engineering benchmarks . It had been quietly topping the OpenLLM leaderboard as "Owl Alpha" before the official release . API pricing is $0.75/$2.95 per million input/output tokens, with a launch promo at $0.30/$1.20 .
| Dimension | Chinese Frontier Models | U.S. Frontier Models |
|---|---|---|
| Capability parity | GLM-5.2 ≈ GPT-5.2 ; DeepSeek V4 Pro ≈ Claude Fable 5 on several benchmarks ; LongCat-2.0 claims to edge GPT-5.5 on SWE-bench | OpenAI GPT-5.5, Anthropic Claude Fable 5/Opus, Google Gemini 3 |
| Cost advantage | Chinese models are 10x–57x cheaper per token or per task | U.S. models charge premium API rates |
| Openness | MIT/modified MIT open-weight licenses; global unrestricted access | Primarily closed API; no weight releases |
| Hardware constraint | China's best models now run entirely on domestic chips (LongCat-2.0 ) | U.S. models use unrestricted access to NVIDIA H100/B200 |
Enterprises outside China now have credible, low-cost, open-weight alternatives to U.S. API models. GLM-5.2's MIT license with zero regional restrictions means any company can self-host it commercially without restriction . This is shifting procurement decisions in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe.
The evidence strongly supports the thesis that U.S. chip export controls have backfired in at least two ways:
No corroborating sources were found for specific per-task pricing of $0.06 for DeepSeek V4 Pro or $2.34 for Claude Opus 5. Tencent Hy3 and Alibaba Qwen3.8-Max also lack verified specifications or release dates in the available evidence. Claims about Mark Zuckerberg's recent open-source manifesto could not be confirmed.
This article is based on available evidence as of mid-August 2026. All claims about model capabilities come from developer-reported benchmarks and third-party assessments (including NIST's CAISI). Independent verification of all benchmark scores is ongoing across the industry. Cost comparisons are based on published API token pricing; actual per-task costs vary significantly by task complexity, context length, and cache hit rates.
The flagship launch that caps the summer wave. DeepSeek V4 Pro is a 1.6-trillion-parameter Mixture-of-Experts model with 49 billion active parameters per token, a 1-million-token context window, and up to 384,000 output tokens across three reasoning modes (standard, high-effort, max-effort) . On Terminal-Bench 2.1, it scored 87.9 — a 15.8% improvement over the April preview — and performs at a level comparable to Claude Fable 5 at roughly 1/57th the cost . Reuters reports the model "closing in on — and in some tests surpassing — Claude Fable 5" on agent and software engineering benchmarks .
Pricing is $0.435 per million input tokens, $0.87 per million output tokens at standard rates, with cache discounts up to 97% . In max-effort reasoning mode, pricing is $1.32/$3.96 per million tokens .
Moonshot AI released what it calls the "world's first open model in the 3-trillion-parameter class" — a 2.8-trillion-parameter Mixture-of-Experts model that activates 16 of 896 experts per token, with a 1-million-token context window and native multimodal (vision + text) capabilities . Full weights were released on Hugging Face on July 27 under a Modified MIT license . It is live on Kimi.com, Kimi Work, Kimi Code, and the Kimi API .
The model that started the wave. GLM-5.2 is a 744-billion-parameter MoE with about 40 billion active per token, a 1-million-token context window, and an MIT license . NIST's CAISI assessment rates its overall capabilities as similar to GPT-5.2 (December 2025) and its cyber capabilities as similar to Claude Opus . It scores 81.0 on Terminal-Bench 2.1 and 62.1 on SWE-bench Pro — the top open-weight score on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index . Pricing is roughly 10x cheaper than Claude or GPT-5 at API .
A 1.6-trillion-parameter MoE (48 billion active per token) with a 1-million-token context window, released under an MIT license . Its critical distinction: the first trillion-parameter model trained and run entirely on domestic Chinese chips — a 50,000-chip cluster of Huawei Ascend 910B/C . By Meituan's testing, it edges past GPT-5.5 on software-engineering benchmarks . It had been quietly topping the OpenLLM leaderboard as "Owl Alpha" before the official release . API pricing is $0.75/$2.95 per million input/output tokens, with a launch promo at $0.30/$1.20 .
| Dimension | Chinese Frontier Models | U.S. Frontier Models |
|---|---|---|
| Capability parity | GLM-5.2 ≈ GPT-5.2 ; DeepSeek V4 Pro ≈ Claude Fable 5 on several benchmarks ; LongCat-2.0 claims to edge GPT-5.5 on SWE-bench | OpenAI GPT-5.5, Anthropic Claude Fable 5/Opus, Google Gemini 3 |
| Cost advantage | Chinese models are 10x–57x cheaper per token or per task | U.S. models charge premium API rates |
| Openness | MIT/modified MIT open-weight licenses; global unrestricted access | Primarily closed API; no weight releases |
| Hardware constraint | China's best models now run entirely on domestic chips (LongCat-2.0 ) | U.S. models use unrestricted access to NVIDIA H100/B200 |
Enterprises outside China now have credible, low-cost, open-weight alternatives to U.S. API models. GLM-5.2's MIT license with zero regional restrictions means any company can self-host it commercially without restriction . This is shifting procurement decisions in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe.
The evidence strongly supports the thesis that U.S. chip export controls have backfired in at least two ways:
No corroborating sources were found for specific per-task pricing of $0.06 for DeepSeek V4 Pro or $2.34 for Claude Opus 5. Tencent Hy3 and Alibaba Qwen3.8-Max also lack verified specifications or release dates in the available evidence. Claims about Mark Zuckerberg's recent open-source manifesto could not be confirmed.
This article is based on available evidence as of mid-August 2026. All claims about model capabilities come from developer-reported benchmarks and third-party assessments (including NIST's CAISI). Independent verification of all benchmark scores is ongoing across the industry. Cost comparisons are based on published API token pricing; actual per-task costs vary significantly by task complexity, context length, and cache hit rates.