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 q8_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 | 1405.2 | 1405.4 | 1405.8 | 1406.5 | 1407.9 | 1410.8 |
| Q8_0 | 746.32 GiB | 747.1 | 747.3 | 747.6 | 748.4 | 749.8 | 752.7 |
| UD-Q6_K | 582.88 GiB | 583.7 | 583.8 | 584.2 | 584.9 | 586.4 | 589.3 |
| UD-Q5_K_M | 522.31 GiB | 523.1 | 523.3 | 523.6 | 524.4 | 525.8 | 528.7 |
| UD-Q5_K_S | 491.05 GiB | 491.8 | 492.0 | 492.4 | 493.1 | 494.6 | 497.5 |
| UD-Q4_K_M | 433.83 GiB | 434.6 | 434.8 | 435.2 | 435.9 | 437.3 | 440.3 |
| UD-Q4_K_S | 406.46 GiB | 407.2 | 407.4 | 407.8 | 408.5 | 410.0 | 412.9 |
| UD-IQ4_NL | 347.07 GiB | 347.8 | 348.0 | 348.4 | 349.1 | 350.6 | 353.5 |
| UD-IQ4_XS | 340.22 GiB | 341.0 | 341.2 | 341.6 | 342.3 | 343.7 | 346.6 |
| UD-Q3_K_M | 319.20 GiB | 320.0 | 320.2 | 320.5 | 321.3 | 322.7 | 325.6 |
| UD-IQ3_S | 287.44 GiB | 288.2 | 288.4 | 288.8 | 289.5 | 291.0 | 293.9 |
| UD-IQ3_XXS | 262.34 GiB | 263.1 | 263.3 | 263.7 | 264.4 | 265.9 | 268.8 |
| UD-IQ2_M | 222.19 GiB | 223.0 | 223.2 | 223.5 | 224.2 | 225.7 | 228.6 |
| UD-IQ2_XXS | 222.08 GiB | 222.9 | 223.0 | 223.4 | 224.1 | 225.6 | 228.5 |
| UD-IQ1_M | 215.35 GiB | 216.1 | 216.3 | 216.7 | 217.4 | 218.9 | 221.8 |
| UD-IQ1_S | 201.83 GiB | 202.6 | 202.8 | 203.2 | 203.9 | 205.3 | 208.3 |
| Q3_K_M | 169.33 GiB | 170.1 | 170.3 | 170.7 | 171.4 | 172.8 | 175.8 |
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.