Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.1

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 leads GLM 5.1 on coding, 70.3 to 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs 7.3x less per output token ($0.60 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 25 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeek
Coding
70.3
Overall
67.6
Output $/M
$0.60
23
GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
49.2
Overall
57.5
Output $/M
$4.40
2
vs boards won of 25 shared

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or GLM 5.1: which to pick

Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 for coding: it scores 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index against 49.2 for GLM 5.1.

Pick GLM 5.1 for work measured by Design Arena: spreadsheets or Design Arena: data viz, where it leads.

Shared results
25
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 only
14
GLM 5.1 only
64
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
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 70.3 from 4 benchmarks, GLM 5.1 49.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 23.4 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 87.7% against GLM 5.1 31.5%, 56.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 $0.60 against GLM 5.1 $4.40 per million output tokens, 7.3x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 takes 1.05M 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
CategoryDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017BarsGLM 5.1Ties
Coding70
Intelligence10
Agentic work21
Reasoning30
Math20
Knowledge10
Web design61
General10
All shared boards232
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index70
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.1Leader
LiveBench coding96.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LMArena WebDev16641508DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
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)31.8%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)87.7%31.5%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Code migration (Vals AI)44.2%25.8%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured56.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
SciCode55.9%44.8%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured43.2%Only GLM 5.1 measured
WeirdMLNot measured57.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
ALE-Bench1622.0887.1DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1485Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1484Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: React16671505DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LMArena WebDev: HTML16871508DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index39.526.1DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured149.8Only GLM 5.1 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.1Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured23.9Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1175Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1167Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1162Only GLM 5.1 measured
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: spreadsheets12451315GLM 5.1
LiveBench research79.5%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench browser76.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench long agentic50.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)57.0%44.8%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)44.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)45.2%27.9%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)14.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured97.7%Only GLM 5.1 measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured40.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$5,634Only GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured84.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LiveBench reasoning89.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured86.8%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)43.3%30.1%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)93.2%89.9%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
SimpleBenchNot measured55.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Chess puzzles46.0%20.0%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Mystery game puzzles49.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1473Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1478Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1482Only GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.1Leader
AIMENot measured91.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME99.4%93.3%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 371.2%36.8%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
FrontierMath, tier 446.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
ProofBenchNot measured22.2%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1473Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1470Only GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 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)Not measured41.6%Only GLM 5.1 measured
SimpleQA Verified42.5%34.0%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1478Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1474Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1465Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1452Only GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.1Leader
Design Arena: websites13111290DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: UI components13031292DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: game dev13571265DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: data viz13301366GLM 5.1
Design Arena: 3D13581336DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: all code categories13321268DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1218Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art12421141DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LiveBench design83.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.1Leader
Vals Index61.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench data analysis79.5%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured61.8%Only GLM 5.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured72.3%Only GLM 5.1 measured
IFBenchNot measured76.3%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.7%73.7%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
ExploitBenchNot measured18.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1463Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1453Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1453Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1476Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1448Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1515Only GLM 5.1 measured
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: FrenchNot measured1470Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1468Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1454Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1449Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1473Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1467Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1454Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1442Only GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 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

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.0004Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.0036Fits in one request

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.0093Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.083Fits in one request

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.036Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.324Exceeds the context window

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 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 V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.1
SpecificationDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Z.ai GLM 5.1
MakerDeepSeekZ.ai
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 17, 2026April 7, 2026
Context window1.05M205K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$1.40
Output $/Mtok$0.60$4.40
Coding index70.349.2
Independent measurements behind it43
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.60
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 better than GLM 5.1 for coding?

Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 for coding: it scores 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index against 49.2 for GLM 5.1. Pick GLM 5.1 for work measured by Design Arena: spreadsheets or Design Arena: data viz, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or GLM 5.1?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 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, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or GLM 5.1?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.1 comparison based on?

25 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017's coding index rests on 4 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/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017-vs-glm-5-1" title="DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 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/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017-vs-glm-5-1">LLMBenchmark.ai, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.1</a></p>