Can I run GLM-5.2 on a Apple M5 Max?
Not at these settings. No indexed quantization of GLM-5.2 fits Apple M5 Max at any context we compute, with q4_0 KV. The smallest shipped quantization is 169.33 GiB in weights alone, against 44.64 GiB usable. CPU offload can still run it, slowly.
Every quantization at every context
| Quant | Weights● | 4K◐ | 8K◐ | 16K◐ | 32K◐ | 64K◐ | 128K◐ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BF16 | 1404.42 GiB | 1405.1 | 1405.2 | 1405.4 | 1405.8 | 1406.6 | 1408.1 |
| Q8_0 | 746.32 GiB | 747.0 | 747.1 | 747.3 | 747.7 | 748.5 | 750.0 |
| UD-Q6_K | 582.88 GiB | 583.6 | 583.7 | 583.9 | 584.2 | 585.0 | 586.6 |
| UD-Q5_K_M | 522.31 GiB | 523.0 | 523.1 | 523.3 | 523.7 | 524.5 | 526.0 |
| UD-Q5_K_S | 491.05 GiB | 491.7 | 491.8 | 492.0 | 492.4 | 493.2 | 494.7 |
| UD-Q4_K_M | 433.83 GiB | 434.5 | 434.6 | 434.8 | 435.2 | 436.0 | 437.5 |
| UD-Q4_K_S | 406.46 GiB | 407.2 | 407.3 | 407.4 | 407.8 | 408.6 | 410.1 |
| UD-IQ4_NL | 347.07 GiB | 347.8 | 347.9 | 348.1 | 348.4 | 349.2 | 350.8 |
| UD-IQ4_XS | 340.22 GiB | 340.9 | 341.0 | 341.2 | 341.6 | 342.4 | 343.9 |
| UD-Q3_K_M | 319.20 GiB | 319.9 | 320.0 | 320.2 | 320.6 | 321.3 | 322.9 |
| UD-IQ3_S | 287.44 GiB | 288.1 | 288.2 | 288.4 | 288.8 | 289.6 | 291.1 |
| UD-IQ3_XXS | 262.34 GiB | 263.0 | 263.1 | 263.3 | 263.7 | 264.5 | 266.0 |
| UD-IQ2_M | 222.19 GiB | 222.9 | 223.0 | 223.2 | 223.6 | 224.3 | 225.9 |
| UD-IQ2_XXS | 222.08 GiB | 222.8 | 222.9 | 223.1 | 223.5 | 224.2 | 225.8 |
| UD-IQ1_M | 215.35 GiB | 216.0 | 216.1 | 216.3 | 216.7 | 217.5 | 219.0 |
| UD-IQ1_S | 201.83 GiB | 202.5 | 202.6 | 202.8 | 203.2 | 204.0 | 205.5 |
| Q3_K_M | 169.33 GiB | 170.0 | 170.1 | 170.3 | 170.7 | 171.5 | 173.0 |
Figures are GiB of total memory: weights plus KV cache plus compute buffer and backend overhead. Weights and KV are near-exact; the overhead term is modeled. Hover any cell for the breakdown.
Why other calculators disagree
A parameters × bits ÷ 8 estimate ignores two things that dominate at long context. First, the weights themselves are not the nominal rate — quantizations are mixtures, so the real file is consistently larger than the label implies. Second, this model uses latent attention and allocates no V cache at all, so any formula reading num_key_value_heads overstates its cache by more than an order of magnitude.