GLM-5.1 vs GPT-5.4
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Following instructions
Wins 6 of 7 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents
GPT-5.4 is the stronger all-rounder.GLM-5.1 is cheaper and better at following instructions.
Scores updated · 53 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.
- MathCompetition and research-level math04GPT-5.44 of 4 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking03GPT-5.43 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software23GPT-5.43 of 6 tests · 1 tie
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own23GPT-5.43 of 5 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up12GPT-5.42 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01GPT-5.41 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10GLM-5.11 of 1 test
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.
GLM-5.1 costs 67% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where GPT-5.4 pulls ahead
- Unpublished advanced math problemsFrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)+41.8points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+27.2points ahead
- Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+26points ahead
Where GLM-5.1 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+61.8points ahead
- Finds the root cause of IT system incidentsAA IT-Bench SRE+5.8points ahead
- Multi-step tasks using many real software toolsMCP Atlas+4.6points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 53 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGPT-5.4
- Terminal-Bench 2.1GPT-5.4 by 16.561.878.3+16.5
- Terminal-Bench HardGPT-5.4 by 14.443.257.6+14.4
- SciCodeGPT-5.4 by 11.844.856.6+11.8
- LMArena · WebDevGLM-5.1 by 43 rating points15081465+43 rating
- SWE-bench MultilingualGLM-5.1 by 1.673.371.7+1.6
- SWE-bench Protie58.457.7tie
AgentsGPT-5.4
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingGPT-5.4 by 2613.639.6+26
- GDPValGPT-5.4 by 6.43137.4+6.4
- AA IT-Bench SREGLM-5.1 by 5.840.334.5+5.8
- MCP AtlasGLM-5.1 by 4.671.867.2+4.6
- BrowseCompGPT-5.4 by 3.479.382.7+3.4
ReasoningGPT-5.4
- CritPtGPT-5.4 by 18.84.623.4+18.8
- Humanity's Last ExamGPT-5.4 by 13.630.143.7+13.6
- GPQA DiamondGPT-5.4 by 5.286.892+5.2
FactsGPT-5.4
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGLM-5.1 by 61.870.18.3+61.8
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGPT-5.4 by 27.223.750.9+27.2
- SimpleQA VerifiedGPT-5.4 by 11.13445.1+11.1
MathGPT-5.4
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)GPT-5.4 by 41.836.878.6+41.8
- HMMT Feb. 2026GPT-5.4 by 15.182.697.7+15.1
- IMOAnswerBenchGPT-5.4 by 7.683.891.4+7.6
- AIME 2026GPT-5.4 by 3.995.399.2+3.9
Other results30 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.
- Apex (Pass@1)GPT-5.4 by 42.611.554.1+42.6
- AA Agentic IndexGPT-5.4 by 1925.244.2+19
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGPT-5.4 by 15.355.871.1+15.3
- AgentWorldBench - SearchGPT-5.4 by 14.822.537.3+14.8
- frontiermath_tier_4_v1GPT-5.4 by 14.612.527.1+14.6
- AgentWorldBench - SWEGPT-5.4 by 14.252.166.3+14.2
- GDPval-AA (Elo)GPT-5.4 by 139 rating points15351674+139 rating
- Tool-DecathlonGPT-5.4 by 13.940.754.6+13.9
- ToolathlonGPT-5.4 by 13.940.754.6+13.9
- AA IntelligenceGPT-5.4 by 12.926.139+12.9
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)GLM-5.1 by 10.697.787.1+10.6
- LiveBenchGPT-5.4 by 10.170.280.3+10.1
- AgentWorldBench - OSGPT-5.4 by 9.559.168.6+9.5
- SWE-QAGPT-5.4 by 8.672.781.3+8.6
- AgentWorldBench - OverallGPT-5.4 by 751.358.3+7
- AgentWorldBench - TerminalGPT-5.4 by 6.447.353.7+6.4
- Terminal-Bench 2.0GPT-5.4 by 6.16975.1+6.1
- Apex Shortlist (Pass@1)GPT-5.4 by 5.772.478.1+5.7
- AA-OmniscienceGPT-5.4 by 4.90.85.8+4.9
- MCPAtlas Public (Pass@1)GLM-5.1 by 4.671.867.2+4.6
- browsecomp_with_context_managerGPT-5.4 by 3.479.382.7+3.4
- AgentWorldBench - MCPGPT-5.4 by 2.567.670.1+2.5
- CyberGymGLM-5.1 by 2.468.766.3+2.4
- τ³-BenchGPT-5.4 by 2.370.672.9+2.3
- HMMT Nov. 2025GPT-5.4 by 1.89495.8+1.8
- MMLU-ProGPT-5.4 by 1.58687.5+1.5
- NL2RepoGLM-5.1 by 1.442.741.3+1.4
- AgentWorldBench - Androidtie59.160tie
- AgentWorldBench - Webtie51.551.8tie
- HLE (with tools)tie52.352tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, GLM-5.1 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 wins six of the seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, math and long documents. GLM-5.1 wins following instructions, and costs 67% less.
Which is better for coding?
GPT-5.4. It wins 3 of the 6 coding tests both models report; GLM-5.1 wins 2, and 1 is a tie.
Which is cheaper?
GLM-5.1 costs $1.38 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 costs $2.50 and $15.00. That makes GLM-5.1 about 67% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 53 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 23 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 30 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.