Nova Pro 1.0 vs GLM 5.1
Updated October 21, 2026. 35 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Pro 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Nova Pro 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 1.4x less, and where the context window is larger, 300K against 205K tokens.
- Shared results
- 35
- Nova Pro 1.0 only
- 7
- GLM 5.1 only
- 54
- Like-for-like categories
- 8 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 leads, 26.1 against 7.0.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only GLM 5.1 has a AA Agentic Index result, 23.9.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GLM 5.1 has a GPQA Diamond result, 84.5%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only GLM 5.1 has a AIME result, 91.9%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GLM 5.1 has a MMLU Pro result, 86.9%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 leads, 1290 against 796.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Nova Pro 1.0
Nova Pro 1.0 takes 300K tokens against 205K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Pro 1.0
Nova Pro 1.0 $0.0024, GLM 5.1 $0.0036 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only GLM 5.1 has the number, $0.60.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nova Pro 1.0 not benchmarked, GLM 5.1 49.2 from 3 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 83.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: Nova Pro 1.0 14.0% against GLM 5.1 97.7%, 83.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nova Pro 1.0 $3.20 against GLM 5.1 $4.40 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
- Context window
- Nova Pro 1.0 takes 300K tokens, GLM 5.1 205K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Nova Pro 1.0 | Bars | GLM 5.1 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 3 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 5 | ||
| Math | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 4 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 1 | ||
| General | 0 | 18 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 35 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1508 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 55.8 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 81.4% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 76.4% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 31.5% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 25.8% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 56.9% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.3% | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 44.8% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.1% | 43.2% | GLM 5.1 |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 57.1% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 887.1 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1270 | 1485 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1271 | 1484 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1505 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1508 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 7.0 | 26.1 | GLM 5.1 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 149.8 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 23.9 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1175 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | Not measured | 1167 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | Not measured | 1161 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1187 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | Not measured | 1053 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building games | Not measured | 1164 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | Not measured | 1170 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: PowerPoint slides | Not measured | 1188 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: spreadsheets | Not measured | 1315 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 44.8% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 27.9% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 14.0% | 97.7% | GLM 5.1 |
| APEX-Agents | Not measured | 40.9% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Not measured | $5,634 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 84.5% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 49.9% | 86.8% | GLM 5.1 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 3.2% | 30.1% | GLM 5.1 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 89.9% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| SimpleBench | Not measured | 55.1% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Chess puzzles | Not measured | 20.0% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1246 | 1473 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1211 | 1478 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1259 | 1482 | GLM 5.1 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 91.9% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| AA Math Index | 7.0 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 7.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 93.3% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 36.8% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 22.2% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1252 | 1473 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1261 | 1470 | GLM 5.1 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 86.9% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.4% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 51.5% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 64.5% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.2% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 41.6% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 69.1% | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not measured | 34.0% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| MMLU | 82.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1255 | 1478 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1260 | 1474 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1281 | 1465 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1229 | 1452 | GLM 5.1 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 796 | 1290 | GLM 5.1 |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1292 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1265 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1366 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1336 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1268 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1218 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1142 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index018
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 61.8% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.3% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| IFBench | 38.1% | 76.3% | GLM 5.1 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 21.0% | 73.7% | GLM 5.1 |
| ExploitBench | Not measured | 18.1% | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1259 | 1463 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1235 | 1453 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1212 | 1453 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Vision | 980 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1276 | 1476 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1233 | 1448 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1244 | 1515 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: German | 1243 | 1467 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1200 | 1435 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1203 | 1424 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: French | 1271 | 1470 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1182 | 1468 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1240 | 1454 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1449 | Only GLM 5.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1246 | 1473 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1255 | 1467 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1247 | 1454 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1210 | 1442 | GLM 5.1 |
| LMArena Vision: English | 987 | Not measured | Only Nova Pro 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Pro 1.0 | GLM 5.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Pro 1.0 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nova Pro 1.0 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nova Pro 1.0 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Amazon Nova Pro 1.0 | Z.ai GLM 5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Amazon | Z.ai |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | December 5, 2024 | April 7, 2026 |
| Context window | 300K | 205K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.80 | $1.40 |
| Output $/Mtok | $3.20 | $4.40 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 49.2 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 3 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.60 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nova Pro 1.0 better than GLM 5.1 for coding?
Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Pro 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Nova Pro 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 1.4x less, and where the context window is larger, 300K against 205K tokens.
Which is cheaper, Nova Pro 1.0 or GLM 5.1?
Nova Pro 1.0 costs $0.80 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; GLM 5.1 costs $1.40 and $4.40. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.1 only.
Which has the bigger context window, Nova Pro 1.0 or GLM 5.1?
Nova Pro 1.0, with 300K tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks is the Nova Pro 1.0 vs GLM 5.1 comparison based on?
35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Pro 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 5.1's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.