Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs GLM 4.5

Claude Opus 4.1 leads GLM 4.5 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 12.8, and GLM 4.5 costs 34.1x less per output token ($2.20 vs $75.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 47 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Opus 4.1 Replace GLM 4.5
Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
No data
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$75.00
32
GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.20
15
vs boards won of 47 shared

Claude Opus 4.1 or GLM 4.5: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for a larger context window (200K against 131K tokens) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) or AIME, where it leads.

Model AClaude Opus 4.1AnthropicNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGLM 4.5Z.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
47
Claude Opus 4.1 only
26
GLM 4.5 only
14
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.1 not benchmarked, GLM 4.5 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 10.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Creative writing (Lech Mazur): Claude Opus 4.1 84.7% against GLM 4.5 73.4%, 11.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against GLM 4.5 $2.20 per million output tokens, 34.1x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, GLM 4.5 131K.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.1BarsGLM 4.5Ties
Coding31
Intelligence10
Reasoning40
Math41
Knowledge44
Web design61
General108
All shared boards3215
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index31
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured64.2%Only GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena WebDev1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%67.5%GLM 4.5
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured73.8%Only GLM 4.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured22.0%Only GLM 4.5 measured
Terminal-Bench38.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
WeirdML45.9%40.6%Claude Opus 4.1
Cybench42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured344.8Only GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding14791434Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14561440Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena WebDev: HTML1399Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index22.812.8Claude Opus 4.1
Epoch Capabilities Index144.1Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured43.0%Only GLM 4.5 measured
METR time horizons66.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GDPval43.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
DeepResearch Bench48.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
GPQA Diamond76.3%72.2%Claude Opus 4.1
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.2%Only GLM 4.5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured13.0%Only GLM 4.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)77.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SimpleBench60.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Mystery game puzzles21.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
EBR-bench7.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCT35.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14421429Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: expert14381433Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14511429Claude Opus 4.1
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured57.9%Only GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
AIME78.2%86.7%GLM 4.5
MATH 500 (Vals AI)95.4%94.0%Claude Opus 4.1
MGSM (Vals AI)94.4%90.8%Claude Opus 4.1
AA Math IndexNot measured73.7Only GLM 4.5 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured73.7%Only GLM 4.5 measured
OTIS Mock AIME68.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 312.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: math14311427Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work14341430Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index44
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
MMLU Pro87.9%81.2%Claude Opus 4.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%75.6%Claude Opus 4.1
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured61.0%Only GLM 4.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%72.4%Claude Opus 4.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%90.0%Claude Opus 4.1
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured83.5%Only GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: science14221444GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14161455GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: legal and government14211438GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14061420GLM 4.5
FACTS Benchmark Suite40.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
Design Arena: websites11771170Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: UI components11651144Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: game dev11711145Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: data viz11661159Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: 3D11531170GLM 4.5
Design Arena: all code categories11711165Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: SVG11521096Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: ASCII art1167Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index108
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)31.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
IFBenchNot measured44.1%Only GLM 4.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured52.7%Only GLM 4.5 measured
DTBench80.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMCA37.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)84.7%73.4%Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text14191430GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: instruction following14351404Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14121395Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: English14331437GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: non-English14051417GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Chinese14271465GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: German14131407Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Japanese13771415GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Korean13811380Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: French14331418Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Spanish14481454GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Russian14221413Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Polish14131422GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn14441415Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14551412Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14181403Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13981404GLM 4.5
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
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.5Leader
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

Claude Opus 4.1$0.052Fits in one request
GLM 4.5$0.0017Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
GLM 4.5$0.142Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.5 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.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.5
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1Z.ai GLM 4.5
MakerAnthropicZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025July 25, 2025
Context window200K131K
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.60
Output $/Mtok$75.00$2.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than GLM 4.5 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for a larger context window (200K against 131K tokens) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) or AIME, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or GLM 4.5?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 and $2.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or GLM 4.5?

Claude Opus 4.1, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs GLM 4.5 comparison based on?

47 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GLM 4.5's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next