Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 5 vs GLM 5.1

Claude Opus 5 leads GLM 5.1 on coding, 83.0 to 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index, and GLM 5.1 costs 5.7x less per output token ($4.40 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 81 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Opus 5 Replace GLM 5.1
Claude Opus 5Anthropic
Coding
83.0
Overall
81.6
Output $/M
$25.00
79
GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
49.2
Overall
57.5
Output $/M
$4.40
2
vs boards won of 81 shared

Claude Opus 5 or GLM 5.1: which to pick

Pick Claude Opus 5 for coding: it scores 83.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 49.2 for GLM 5.1.

Pick GLM 5.1 for output tokens 5.7x cheaper ($4.40 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.60 against $1.33).

Model AClaude Opus 5Anthropic83.0/1006 independent benchmarks$1.33 per solved taskModel BGLM 5.1Z.ai49.2/1003 independent benchmarks$0.60 per solved task
Shared results
81
Claude Opus 5 only
50
GLM 5.1 only
8
Like-for-like categories
8 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 5 83.0 from 6 benchmarks, GLM 5.1 49.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 30.7 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: Claude Opus 5 99.0% against GLM 5.1 22.2%, 76.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 5 $25.00 against GLM 5.1 $4.40 per million output tokens, 5.7x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 5 takes 1M 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 5BarsGLM 5.1Ties
Coding150
Intelligence20
Agentic work120
Reasoning90
Math50
Knowledge100
Web design62
General200
All shared boards792
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index150
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
LiveBench coding90.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena WebDev16891508Claude Opus 5
AA Coding Index78.055.8Claude Opus 5
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)89.0%81.4%Claude Opus 5
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)97.0%76.4%Claude Opus 5
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)53.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)88.4%31.5%Claude Opus 5
Code migration (Vals AI)57.5%25.8%Claude Opus 5
ProgramBench (Vals AI)3.0%0.0%Claude Opus 5
IOI (Vals AI)84.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)84.6%56.9%Claude Opus 5
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)28.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)60.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)65.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
SciCode56.4%44.8%Claude Opus 5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured43.2%Only GLM 5.1 measured
FrontierCode53.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
FrontierSWE52.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
WeirdML91.8%57.1%Claude Opus 5
ALE-Bench2164.6887.1Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: coding15331485Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: software and IT15271484Claude Opus 5
LMArena WebDev: React17111505Claude Opus 5
LMArena WebDev: HTML16801508Claude Opus 5
LMArena WebDev: from an image1662Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
SciCode13.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index50.826.1Claude Opus 5
Epoch Capabilities Index163.9149.8Claude Opus 5
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index120
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
AA Agentic Index56.523.9Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: agents building web apps12661175Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps13061167Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps13481162Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: agents building Android apps12571182Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: agents building Godot games12791053Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: agents building games12611164Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1120Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides12401163Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1315Only GLM 5.1 measured
LiveBench research88.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LiveBench browser84.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LiveBench long agentic62.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)12.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)58.6%44.8%Claude Opus 5
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)45.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)55.3%27.9%Claude Opus 5
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)73.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)27.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Vals Science Index47.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)18.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)9.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured97.7%Only GLM 5.1 measured
APEX-Agents65.8%40.9%Claude Opus 5
OSWorld 2.031.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
BALROG63.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
PostTrainBench35.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$11,182$5,634Claude Opus 5
LMArena Search1242Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index90
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
GPQA Diamond93.4%84.5%Claude Opus 5
LiveBench reasoning91.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)37.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)89.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)93.7%86.8%Claude Opus 5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)54.9%30.1%Claude Opus 5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)93.9%89.9%Claude Opus 5
ARC-AGI97.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
ARC-AGI-290.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
SimpleBench80.6%55.1%Claude Opus 5
Chess puzzles43.0%20.0%Claude Opus 5
Mystery game puzzles59.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
EBR-bench45.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts15271473Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: expert15541478Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15231482Claude Opus 5
LMArena Vision: diagrams1348Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1338Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
AIMENot measured91.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME98.9%93.3%Claude Opus 5
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 385.6%36.8%Claude Opus 5
FrontierMath, tier 473.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
ProofBench99.0%22.2%Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: math15331473Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: mathematical work15441470Claude Opus 5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index100
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
MMLU Pro91.6%86.9%Claude Opus 5
LegalBench (Vals AI)87.0%84.4%Claude Opus 5
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured51.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)73.2%64.5%Claude Opus 5
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.1%71.2%Claude Opus 5
MortgageTax (Vals AI)72.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)63.6%41.6%Claude Opus 5
SimpleQA Verified59.9%34.0%Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: science15311478Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare15251474Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: legal and government15301465Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: business and finance15011452Claude Opus 5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index62
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
Design Arena: websites13091290Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: UI components13461292Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: game dev13371265Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: data viz13291366GLM 5.1
Design Arena: 3D13341336GLM 5.1
Design Arena: all code categories13231268Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: SVG13111218Claude Opus 5
Design Arena: ASCII art13521141Claude Opus 5
LiveBench design83.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index200
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
LiveBench data analysis74.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)76.9%61.8%Claude Opus 5
SAGE (Vals AI)49.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)91.0%72.3%Claude Opus 5
Vals Multimodal Index73.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
IFBenchNot measured76.3%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.0%73.7%Claude Opus 5
DTBench97.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMCA64.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Furniture assembly60.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
ExploitBenchNot measured18.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text15091463Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: instruction following15181453Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: creative writing14931453Claude Opus 5
LMArena Vision1320Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena Text: English15081476Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: non-English15021448Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: Chinese15731515Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: German15271467Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: Japanese15201435Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: Korean15171424Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: French15191470Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: Spanish15231468Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: Russian15071454Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: Polish15221449Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: multi-turn15001473Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: longer queries15171467Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: writing and language14991454Claude Opus 5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14811442Claude Opus 5
LMArena Vision: English1315Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1400Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1329Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1293Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1313Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
LMArena Document1516Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5GLM 5.1Leader
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 5$0.018Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.0036Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 5$0.325Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.083Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 5$1.25Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.324Exceeds the context window

GLM 5.1 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 5 and GLM 5.1
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 5Z.ai GLM 5.1
MakerAnthropicZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 24, 2026April 7, 2026
Context window1M205K
Input $/Mtok$5.00$1.40
Output $/Mtok$25.00$4.40
Coding index83.049.2
Independent measurements behind it63
Cost per solved task$1.33$0.60
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 5 better than GLM 5.1 for coding?

Pick Claude Opus 5 for coding: it scores 83.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 49.2 for GLM 5.1. Pick GLM 5.1 for output tokens 5.7x cheaper ($4.40 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.60 against $1.33).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or GLM 5.1?

Claude Opus 5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; GLM 5.1 costs $1.40 and $4.40. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Claude Opus 5 costs $1.33 and GLM 5.1 $0.60.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 5 or GLM 5.1?

Claude Opus 5, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 5 vs GLM 5.1 comparison based on?

81 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 5's coding index rests on 6 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.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/claude-opus-5-vs-glm-5-1" title="Claude Opus 5 vs GLM 5.1, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/claude-opus-5-vs-glm-5-1">LLMBenchmark.ai, Claude Opus 5 vs GLM 5.1</a></p>