Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs GLM 5 Turbo

GLM 5 Turbo leads DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.6 to 14.8, and DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs 3.9x less per output token ($1.0142 vs $4.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V3.1 TerminusDeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.0142
1
GLM 5 TurboZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$4.00
14
vs boards won of 15 shared

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GLM 5 Turbo: which to pick

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

Pick DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus for output tokens 3.9x cheaper ($1.0142 vs $4.00 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
15
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus only
30
GLM 5 Turbo only
1
Like-for-like categories
6 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
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus not benchmarked, GLM 5 Turbo not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 61.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus 37.1% against GLM 5 Turbo 98.5%, 61.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus $1.0142 against GLM 5 Turbo $4.00 per million output tokens, 3.9x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus takes 164K tokens, GLM 5 Turbo 203K.

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
CategoryDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusBarsGLM 5 TurboTies
Coding11
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Web design07
General02
All shared boards114
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
AA Coding Index43.5Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)79.8%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
SciCode38.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.8%33.3%GLM 5 Turbo
ALE-Bench745.2634.0DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: coding1425Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1426Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
AA Intelligence Index14.826.6GLM 5 Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
AA Agentic Index6.8Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
τ²-Bench Telecom37.1%98.5%GLM 5 Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%84.7%GLM 5 Turbo
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)16.4%27.8%GLM 5 Turbo
LMArena Text: hard prompts1426Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1432Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
AA Math Index89.7Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)89.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: math1402Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: science1451Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1468Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1457Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1414Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
Design Arena: websites11871262GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: UI components11821260GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: game dev11311248GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: data viz11681264GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: 3D11411247GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: all code categories11751261GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: SVG10651205GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1160Only GLM 5 Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
IFBench57.0%73.2%GLM 5 Turbo
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%71.7%GLM 5 Turbo
DTBench81.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMCA28.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text1419Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1404Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1403Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: English1429Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: non-English1408Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: Russian1435Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: Polish1427Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1411Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1422Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1409Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1391Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGLM 5 TurboLeader
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

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.0008Fits in one request
GLM 5 Turbo$0.0032Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.018Fits in one request
GLM 5 Turbo$0.072Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.071Exceeds the context window
GLM 5 Turbo$0.280Exceeds the context window

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus 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 DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GLM 5 Turbo
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusZ.ai GLM 5 Turbo
MakerDeepSeekZ.ai
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2025March 15, 2026
Context window164K203K
Input $/Mtok$0.3063$1.20
Output $/Mtok$1.0142$4.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus better than GLM 5 Turbo for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus for output tokens 3.9x cheaper ($1.0142 vs $4.00 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GLM 5 Turbo?

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs $0.3063 per million input tokens and $1.0142 per million output tokens; GLM 5 Turbo costs $1.20 and $4.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GLM 5 Turbo?

GLM 5 Turbo, with 203K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs GLM 5 Turbo comparison based on?

15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 5 Turbo's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next