Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs GLM 4.6V

Claude Opus 4.1 leads GLM 4.6V on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 11.2, and GLM 4.6V costs 83.3x less per output token ($0.90 vs $75.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 21 benchmarks have a result for both.

Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
No data
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$75.00
21
GLM 4.6VZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.90
0
vs boards won of 21 shared

Claude Opus 4.1 or GLM 4.6V: 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).

Shared results
21
Claude Opus 4.1 only
52
GLM 4.6V only
17
Like-for-like categories
5 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 4.6V not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 12.9 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: longer queries: Claude Opus 4.1 1455 against GLM 4.6V 1357, 16.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against GLM 4.6V $0.90 per million output tokens, 83.3x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, GLM 4.6V 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 4.6VTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning30
Knowledge40
General110
All shared boards210
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
LMArena WebDev1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured41.1%Only GLM 4.6V measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured14.4%Only GLM 4.6V measured
Terminal-Bench38.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
WeirdML45.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Cybench42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding14791389Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14561391Claude 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 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.811.2Claude 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 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured31.6%Only GLM 4.6V 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 index30
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
GPQA Diamond76.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured71.9%Only GLM 4.6V measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured9.6%Only GLM 4.6V 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 prompts14421367Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: expert14381371Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14511391Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1182Only GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1155Only GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
AIME78.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)95.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured85.3Only GLM 4.6V measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured85.3%Only GLM 4.6V 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: math1431Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1434Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
MMLU Pro87.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured79.9%Only GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: science14221389Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14161389Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14211393Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14061359Claude Opus 4.1
FACTS Benchmark Suite40.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
Design Arena: websites1177Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1165Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1171Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1166Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1153Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1171Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG1152Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
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 index110
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
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 measured30.1%Only GLM 4.6V measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured48.7%Only GLM 4.6V 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%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text14191376Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14351350Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14121347Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1164Only GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: English14331395Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: non-English14051358Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Chinese14271425Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: German1413Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1377Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1381Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1433Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1448Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14221339Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Polish1413Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14441359Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14551357Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14181347Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13981343Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1179Only GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1217Only GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1171Only GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1113Only GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 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 4.6V
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GLM 4.6VLeader
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 4.6V$0.0008Fits in one request

GLM 4.6V costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
GLM 4.6V$0.018Fits in one request

GLM 4.6V costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
GLM 4.6V$0.069Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.6V 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 4.6V
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1Z.ai GLM 4.6V
MakerAnthropicZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025December 8, 2025
Context window200K131K
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.30
Output $/Mtok$75.00$0.90
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 4.6V 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).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or GLM 4.6V?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; GLM 4.6V costs $0.30 and $0.90. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or GLM 4.6V?

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

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs GLM 4.6V comparison based on?

21 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 4.6V's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next