LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.5

Updated October 21, 2026. 47 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Claude Sonnet 4.5Anthropic
Coding
59.1
Overall
20.7
Output $/M
$15.00
43
GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
64.2
Overall
12.8
Output $/M
$2.20
4
vs boards won of 47 shared

Decision reading

Pick GLM 4.5 for coding: it scores 64.2 on the Vibe Coding Index against 59.1 for Claude Sonnet 4.5, though on 1 benchmark against 2.

Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 when the context window is larger, 1M against 131K tokens, or when what matters is SWE-bench Verified or LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
47
Claude Sonnet 4.5 only
45
GLM 4.5 only
13
Like-for-like categories
7 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Sonnet 4.5 59.1 from 2 benchmarks, GLM 4.5 64.2 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Intelligence, 7.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
SWE-bench Verified: Claude Sonnet 4.5 74.8% against GLM 4.5 64.2%, 10.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Sonnet 4.5 $15.00 against GLM 4.5 $2.20 per million output tokens, 6.8x apart.
Context window
Claude Sonnet 4.5 takes 1M 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 Sonnet 4.5BarsGLM 4.5Ties
Coding50
Intelligence10
Reasoning40
Math40
Knowledge81
Web design61
General152
All shared boards434
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index50
Coding benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 4.5Leader
SWE-bench Verified74.8%64.2%Claude Sonnet 4.5
SWE-bench Multilingual67.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
LMArena WebDev1394Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
AA Coding Index52.1Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)73.0%67.5%Claude Sonnet 4.5
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)70.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)22.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
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-Bench46.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
GSO-Bench14.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
WeirdML47.7%40.6%Claude Sonnet 4.5
Cybench60.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured344.8Only GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding14881434Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: software and IT14731440Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena WebDev: React1386Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1399Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 4.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index20.712.8Claude Sonnet 4.5
Epoch Capabilities Index146.7Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 4.5Leader
AA Agentic Index15.8Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1060Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1050Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1137Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured43.0%Only GLM 4.5 measured
METR time horizons67.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Remote Labor Index2.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
GDPval42.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
DeepResearch Bench52.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
OSWorld62.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$3,839Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 4.5Leader
GPQA Diamond81.6%72.2%Claude Sonnet 4.5
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)79.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 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)82.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
ARC-AGI63.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
ARC-AGI-213.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
SimpleBench54.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Chess puzzles10.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Mystery game puzzles17.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
EBR-bench2.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
VPCT39.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14621429Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: expert14831433Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14711429Claude Sonnet 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 4.5Leader
AIME88.2%86.7%Claude Sonnet 4.5
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured94.0%Only GLM 4.5 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.3%90.8%Claude Sonnet 4.5
AA Math IndexNot measured73.7Only GLM 4.5 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured73.7%Only GLM 4.5 measured
OTIS Mock AIME77.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 323.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
ProofBench19.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
MATH level 597.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: math14491427Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work14621430Claude Sonnet 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index81
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 4.5Leader
MMLU Pro87.4%81.2%Claude Sonnet 4.5
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.1%75.6%Claude Sonnet 4.5
CaseLaw (Vals AI)62.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)62.0%61.0%Claude Sonnet 4.5
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.3%72.4%Claude Sonnet 4.5
MortgageTax (Vals AI)64.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)94.7%90.0%Claude Sonnet 4.5
MedCode (Vals AI)44.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured83.5%Only GLM 4.5 measured
SimpleQA Verified30.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: science14481444Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14441455GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: legal and government14511438Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14401420Claude Sonnet 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Web design benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 4.5Leader
Design Arena: websites11901170Claude Sonnet 4.5
Design Arena: UI components11731144Claude Sonnet 4.5
Design Arena: game dev11661145Claude Sonnet 4.5
Design Arena: data viz11671159Claude Sonnet 4.5
Design Arena: 3D11581170GLM 4.5
Design Arena: all code categories11831165Claude Sonnet 4.5
Design Arena: SVG11141096Claude Sonnet 4.5
Design Arena: ASCII art1204Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index152
General benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 4.5Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)36.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)84.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
IFBenchNot measured44.1%Only GLM 4.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured52.7%Only GLM 4.5 measured
DTBench83.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
LMCA38.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured73.4%Only GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text14381430Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: instruction following14591404Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: creative writing14421395Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: English14501437Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: non-English14251417Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: Chinese14601465GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: German14271407Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: Japanese13901415GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Korean14021380Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: French14591418Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: Spanish14581454Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: Russian14371413Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: Polish14231422Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn14651415Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: longer queries14751412Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: writing and language14421403Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14281404Claude Sonnet 4.5
LMArena Document1450Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM 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 Sonnet 4.5$0.011Fits in one request
GLM 4.5$0.0017Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Sonnet 4.5$0.195Fits in one request
GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Sonnet 4.5$0.750Fits in one request
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 Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.5
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Sonnet 4.5Z.ai GLM 4.5
MakerAnthropicZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 29, 2025July 25, 2025
Context window1M131K
Input $/Mtok$3.00$0.60
Output $/Mtok$15.00$2.20
Coding index59.164.2
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved task$1.16Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than GLM 4.5 for coding?

Pick GLM 4.5 for coding: it scores 64.2 on the Vibe Coding Index against 59.1 for Claude Sonnet 4.5, though on 1 benchmark against 2. Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 when the context window is larger, 1M against 131K tokens, or when what matters is SWE-bench Verified or LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.5?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 and $2.20. Cost per solved task is known for Claude Sonnet 4.5 only.

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

Claude Sonnet 4.5, with 1M tokens against 131K.

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

47 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Sonnet 4.5's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and GLM 4.5's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next