Skip to content
VECTOR WIREAI INTELLIGENCE
⌘K
UTC
Models741Deals30d271Policy30d66, 14 pendingSources1,015

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM-5.1

Anthropic · released

Wins 0 of 7 areas

—

Z.ai · released

Wins 7 of 7 areas

Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents · Following instructions

GLM-5.1 is the stronger all-rounder.

Scores updated · 37 tests both models report · How we compare

Where each one wins

Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.

Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.

What it costs

Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.

Claude Sonnet 4.5$3.00 to read · $15.00 to write$18Price from Artificial Analysis
GLM-5.1$1.38 to read · $4.40 to write$5.78Price from Artificial Analysis

GLM-5.1 costs 68% less for the same work.

The biggest differences

The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.

Where GLM-5.1 pulls ahead

  • Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+55.2points aheadGLM-5.179.3Claude Sonnet 4.524.1
  • Multi-step tasks using many real software toolsMCP Atlas+28points aheadGLM-5.171.8Claude Sonnet 4.543.8
  • Recent programming contest problemsLiveCodeBench v6+21.7points aheadGLM-5.185.7Claude Sonnet 4.564

Where Claude Sonnet 4.5 pulls ahead

  • Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+10.9points aheadClaude Sonnet 4.524.5GLM-5.113.6
  • Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+9.2points aheadClaude Sonnet 4.532.9GLM-5.123.7
  • Fixes real GitHub issues in Python projectsSWE-bench Verified+1points aheadClaude Sonnet 4.577.2GLM-5.176.2

Every test, side by side

All 37 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.

CodingGLM-5.1

Full coding ranking

AgentsGLM-5.1

Full agents ranking

ReasoningGLM-5.1

Full reasoning ranking

FactsGLM-5.1

Full facts ranking

MathGLM-5.1

Full math ranking

Long documentsGLM-5.1
  • AA-LCRGLM-5.1 by 1.472.373.7+1.4

Full long documents ranking

Following instructionsGLM-5.1

Full following instructions ranking

Other results13 tests, not counted

Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.

Questions people ask

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM-5.1?

GLM-5.1 wins all seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, math, long documents and following instructions. Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins none.

Which is better for coding?

GLM-5.1. It wins 6 of the 8 coding tests both models report; Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins 1, and 1 is a tie.

Which is cheaper?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 costs $1.38 and $4.40. That makes GLM-5.1 about 68% cheaper for the same work.

How do you compare the two?

We use the 37 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 24 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 13 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.5 with

Anthropic

Across the field

Compare GLM-5.1 with

Z.ai

Across the field

All comparisons