Featured image of post [Expired] I now use GLM 4.6 more often.
Coding

[Expired] I now use GLM 4.6 more often.

Comparing the Experience Differences Between GLM 4.6 and DeepSeek v3.2 in Practical Use

语速 
1
2
3

● Update(content/post/2025-10-24-我又买了-kimi-coding-plan/pics/bg.svg)
  ⎿  Error editing file
  ⎿  Interrupted · What should Claude do instead?

updated at: 2025-10-27 I only use glm4.6 for very simple tasks. In practical experience, minor issues frequently arise. For example, when using claude code, it is unable to update files. Here are some recent experiences using code agents.

Model Comparison

Based on my practical usage, GLM 4.6 is still slightly stronger than DeepSeek v3.2.

For example, in a Next.js project, I configured nextjs config -> baseUrl 192.168.2.14:8080. GLM 4.6 was able to recognize this pre-configured setting without explicit context, whereas DeepSeek v3.2 could not.

However, GLM 4.6 is not superior in all aspects. When dealing with relatively ambiguous problems, DeepSeek v3.2 is more conservative and does not violate the constraints I set before task completion. In contrast, GLM 4.6 tends to ignore my constraints, makes bold modifications, and ends up breaking things.

Tools

Compared to using GLM 4.6 in Claude Code / Cline, the experience in Kilo Code is the best.

  • Kilo Code can read files in parallel, while CC can only read them one by one.
  • Kilo Code enforces the generation of a plan, imposing more restrictions on the big model compared to CC.
  • The visual interface is more user-friendly. I can directly ban Python commands (I need to execute uv run instead of directly running Python commands).

However, Kilo Code itself also has issues. It cannot use MCP servers of the input; http type, which prevents the use of web-search-prime on Kilo Code.