Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 Air vs GPT-5.1-Codex-Max

GLM 4.5 Air costs 9.1x less per output token than GPT-5.1-Codex-Max ($1.10 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

GLM 4.5 AirZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.10
GPT-5.1-Codex-MaxOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
vs $1.10 vs $10.00 per 1M output tokens. GLM 4.5 Air is 9.1x cheaper.

GLM 4.5 Air or GPT-5.1-Codex-Max: which to pick

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

Pick GLM 4.5 Air for output tokens 9.1x cheaper ($1.10 vs $10.00 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. GLM 4.5 Air has results on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) and GSO-Bench; GPT-5.1-Codex-Max on LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and Terminal-Bench. Compare them on price and context instead.

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
GLM 4.5 Air not benchmarked, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
GLM 4.5 Air $1.10 against GPT-5.1-Codex-Max $10.00 per million output tokens, 9.1x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 Air takes 131K tokens, GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 400K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxLeader
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured83.6%Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured22.2%Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)68.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)20.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured60.4%Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
GSO-Bench2.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1228.3Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
LMArena Text: coding1397Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1401Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.1Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom46.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
METR time horizonsNot measured70.8%Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)73.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1379Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: expert1370Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1388Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark43.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxLeader
AA Math Index80.7Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)80.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
ProofBenchNot measured9.0%Only GPT-5.1-Codex-Max measured
LMArena Text: math1396Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1396Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)81.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: science1407Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1402Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1382Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1371Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxLeader
Design Arena: websites1146Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Design Arena: UI components1123Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Design Arena: game dev1094Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Design Arena: data viz1186Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Design Arena: 3D1123Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Design Arena: all code categories1137Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Design Arena: SVG1071Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19 boards measured
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirGPT-5.1-Codex-MaxLeader
IFBench37.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)46.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text1384Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1354Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1343Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: English1397Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: non-English1366Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1426Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: German1377Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1348Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Korean1308Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: French1400Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1385Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Russian1373Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: Polish1368Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1371Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1366Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1354Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1339Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 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

GLM 4.5 Air$0.0008Fits in one request
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max$0.0063Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.013Fits in one request
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max$0.092Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.051Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max$0.350Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air 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 GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5 AirOpenAI GPT-5.1-Codex-Max
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025December 4, 2025
Context window131K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.20$1.25
Output $/Mtok$1.10$10.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 Air better than GPT-5.1-Codex-Max for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 Air for output tokens 9.1x cheaper ($1.10 vs $10.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 Air or GPT-5.1-Codex-Max?

GLM 4.5 Air costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1-Codex-Max costs $1.25 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 Air or GPT-5.1-Codex-Max?

GPT-5.1-Codex-Max, with 400K tokens against 131K.

Has any benchmark tested both GLM 4.5 Air and GPT-5.1-Codex-Max?

No benchmark has tested both yet. GLM 4.5 Air has results on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) and GSO-Bench; GPT-5.1-Codex-Max on LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and Terminal-Bench. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next