Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GLM 5.1

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads GLM 5.1 on coding, 87.3 to 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index, and GLM 5.1 costs 2.3x less per output token ($4.40 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 59 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Sonnet 5.5 Replace GLM 5.1
Claude Sonnet 5.5Anthropic
Coding
87.3
Overall
82.8
Output $/M
$10.00
55
GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
49.2
Overall
57.5
Output $/M
$4.40
4
vs boards won of 59 shared

Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GLM 5.1: which to pick

Pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 for coding: it scores 87.3 on the Vibe Coding Index against 49.2 for GLM 5.1.

Pick GLM 5.1 for output tokens 2.3x cheaper ($4.40 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by Design Arena: spreadsheets or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.

Model AClaude Sonnet 5.5Anthropic87.3/1005 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved taskModel BGLM 5.1Z.ai49.2/1003 independent benchmarks$0.60 per solved task
Shared results
59
Claude Sonnet 5.5 only
37
GLM 5.1 only
30
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 Sonnet 5.5 87.3 from 5 benchmarks, GLM 5.1 49.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 29.4 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: Claude Sonnet 5.5 100.0% against GLM 5.1 22.2%, 77.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Sonnet 5.5 $10.00 against GLM 5.1 $4.40 per million output tokens, 2.3x apart.
Context window
Claude Sonnet 5.5 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 Sonnet 5.5BarsGLM 5.1Ties
Coding110
Intelligence20
Agentic work61
Reasoning60
Math50
Knowledge51
Web design60
General142
All shared boards554
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index110
Coding benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 5.1Leader
LiveBench coding94.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev17681508Claude Sonnet 5.5
AA Coding IndexNot measured55.8Only GLM 5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured81.4%Only GLM 5.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured76.4%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)64.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)92.4%31.5%Claude Sonnet 5.5
Code migration (Vals AI)69.8%25.8%Claude Sonnet 5.5
ProgramBench (Vals AI)6.5%0.0%Claude Sonnet 5.5
IOI (Vals AI)83.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)83.2%56.9%Claude Sonnet 5.5
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)58.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)59.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
SciCode61.0%44.8%Claude Sonnet 5.5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured43.2%Only GLM 5.1 measured
FrontierCode52.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
FrontierSWE61.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
WeirdMLNot measured57.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
ALE-Bench1819.1887.1Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: coding15131485Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: software and IT15041484Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena WebDev: React18171505Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena WebDev: HTML17411508Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena WebDev: from an image1737Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
SciCode13.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 5.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index56.026.1Claude Sonnet 5.5
Epoch Capabilities Index166.2149.8Claude Sonnet 5.5
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 5.1Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured23.9Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps13051175Claude Sonnet 5.5
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1167Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps12601162Claude Sonnet 5.5
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1182Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1053Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1164Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1120Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1163Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets12601315GLM 5.1
LiveBench research83.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LiveBench browser84.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LiveBench long agentic78.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)30.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)58.1%44.8%Claude Sonnet 5.5
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)48.1%27.9%Claude Sonnet 5.5
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)10.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)75.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)81.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)47.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Vals Science Index59.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured97.7%Only GLM 5.1 measured
APEX-Agents75.5%40.9%Claude Sonnet 5.5
SpireClimb1.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$11,165$5,634Claude Sonnet 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 5.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured84.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LiveBench reasoning91.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)49.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured86.8%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)55.0%30.1%Claude Sonnet 5.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)95.6%89.9%Claude Sonnet 5.5
SimpleBenchNot measured55.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Chess puzzles59.0%20.0%Claude Sonnet 5.5
Mystery game puzzles65.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14941473Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: expert15311478Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15021482Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Vision: diagrams1329Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1331Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Math benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 5.1Leader
AIMENot measured91.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%93.3%Claude Sonnet 5.5
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 388.8%36.8%Claude Sonnet 5.5
FrontierMath, tier 480.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
ProofBench100.0%22.2%Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: math14971473Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work15101470Claude Sonnet 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index51
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 5.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured86.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.4%Only GLM 5.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured51.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured64.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.2%Only GLM 5.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)52.9%41.6%Claude Sonnet 5.5
SimpleQA Verified46.5%34.0%Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: science14831478Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14641474GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14831465Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14681452Claude Sonnet 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 5.1Leader
Design Arena: websites13261290Claude Sonnet 5.5
Design Arena: UI components13681292Claude Sonnet 5.5
Design Arena: game dev14711265Claude Sonnet 5.5
Design Arena: data viz13921366Claude Sonnet 5.5
Design Arena: 3D14451336Claude Sonnet 5.5
Design Arena: all code categories13641268Claude Sonnet 5.5
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1218Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1141Only GLM 5.1 measured
LiveBench design85.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index142
General benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 5.1Leader
Vals Index70.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LiveBench data analysis59.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)67.2%61.8%Claude Sonnet 5.5
SAGE (Vals AI)51.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)91.1%72.3%Claude Sonnet 5.5
IFBenchNot measured76.3%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.7%73.7%Claude Sonnet 5.5
DTBench97.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LMCA68.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Furniture assembly75.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
ExploitBenchNot measured18.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text14731463Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: instruction following14921453Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: creative writing14671453Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Vision1287Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: English14841476Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: non-English14561448Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: Chinese15351515Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1467Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1435Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1424Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: French14991470Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: Spanish14511468GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Russian14541454Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1449Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14651473GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14951467Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: writing and language14741454Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14611442Claude Sonnet 5.5
LMArena Vision: English1289Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1297Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1242Not measuredOnly Claude Sonnet 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5GLM 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 Sonnet 5.5$0.0070Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.0036Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Sonnet 5.5$0.130Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.083Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Sonnet 5.5$0.500Fits 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 Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5.1
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Sonnet 5.5Z.ai GLM 5.1
MakerAnthropicZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 28, 2026April 7, 2026
Context window1M205K
Input $/Mtok$2.00$1.40
Output $/Mtok$10.00$4.40
Coding index87.349.2
Independent measurements behind it53
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.60
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than GLM 5.1 for coding?

Pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 for coding: it scores 87.3 on the Vibe Coding Index against 49.2 for GLM 5.1. Pick GLM 5.1 for output tokens 2.3x cheaper ($4.40 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by Design Arena: spreadsheets or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GLM 5.1?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $10.00 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, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GLM 5.1?

Claude Sonnet 5.5, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GLM 5.1 comparison based on?

59 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Sonnet 5.5's coding index rests on 5 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-sonnet-5-5-vs-glm-5-1" title="Claude Sonnet 5.5 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-sonnet-5-5-vs-glm-5-1">LLMBenchmark.ai, Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GLM 5.1</a></p>