Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 Air vs Phi 4

Updated October 21, 2026. 38 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GLM 4.5 AirZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
11.1
Output $/M
$1.10
38
Phi 4Microsoft
Coding
No data
Overall
5.9
Output $/M
$0.14
0
vs boards won of 38 shared

Decision reading

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

GLM 4.5 Air has the edge where the context window is larger, 131K against 16K tokens.

Shared results
38
GLM 4.5 Air only
9
Phi 4 only
7
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
GLM 4.5 Air not benchmarked, Phi 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 46.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Math Index: GLM 4.5 Air 80.7 against Phi 4 18.0, 62.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 Air $1.10 against Phi 4 $0.14 per million output tokens, 7.9x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 Air takes 131K tokens, Phi 4 16K.

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
CategoryGLM 4.5 AirBarsPhi 4Ties
Coding40
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Math40
Knowledge50
General180
All shared boards380
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)68.4%23.1%GLM 4.5 Air
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)20.5%3.8%GLM 4.5 Air
GSO-Bench2.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: coding13971231GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: software and IT14011228GLM 4.5 Air
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
AA Intelligence Index11.15.9GLM 4.5 Air
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured130.5Only Phi 4 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom46.5%0.0%GLM 4.5 Air
BALROGNot measured11.6%Only Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)73.3%57.5%GLM 4.5 Air
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.0%3.8%GLM 4.5 Air
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured56.1%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13791220GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: expert13701203GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13881230GLM 4.5 Air
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
AA Math Index80.718.0GLM 4.5 Air
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)80.7%18.0%GLM 4.5 Air
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured13.8%Only Phi 4 measured
MATH level 5Not measured64.9%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: math13961246GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: mathematical work13961254GLM 4.5 Air
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)81.5%71.4%GLM 4.5 Air
MMLUNot measured84.8%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: science14071206GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14021202GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: legal and government13821241GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: business and finance13711199GLM 4.5 Air
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
Design Arena: websites1147Not 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: 3D1122Not 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
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index180
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
IFBench37.6%23.5%GLM 4.5 Air
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)46.7%0.0%GLM 4.5 Air
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured62.6%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text13841217GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: instruction following13541201GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: creative writing13431181GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: English13971231GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: non-English13661197GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Chinese14261212GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: German13771222GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Japanese13481158GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Korean13081151GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: French14001224GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Spanish13851234GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Russian13731209GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Polish1368Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13711206GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: longer queries13661217GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: writing and language13541198GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13391162GLM 4.5 Air
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Phi 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirPhi 4Leader
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

GLM 4.5 Air$0.0008Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0001Fits in one request

Phi 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.013Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0039Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.051Exceeds the context window
Phi 4$0.015Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 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 Phi 4
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5 AirMicrosoft Phi 4
MakerZ.aiMicrosoft
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025January 10, 2025
Context window131K16K
Input $/Mtok$0.20$0.07
Output $/Mtok$1.10$0.14
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 Air better than Phi 4 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GLM 4.5 Air has the edge where the context window is larger, 131K against 16K tokens.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 Air or Phi 4?

GLM 4.5 Air costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; Phi 4 costs $0.07 and $0.14. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 Air or Phi 4?

GLM 4.5 Air, with 131K tokens against 16K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 Air vs Phi 4 comparison based on?

38 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.5 Air's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Phi 4's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next