LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 vs GPT-4.1 Nano

Updated October 21, 2026. 52 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace GLM 4.5 Replace GPT-4.1 Nano
GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
64.2
Overall
12.8
Output $/M
$2.20
52
GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI
Coding
8.9
Overall
7.8
Output $/M
$0.40
0
vs boards won of 52 shared

Decision reading

Pick GLM 4.5 for coding: it scores 64.2 on the Vibe Coding Index against 8.9 for GPT-4.1 Nano.

Pick GPT-4.1 Nano when output tokens cost 5.5x less, or when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 131K tokens.

Model AGLM 4.5Z.ai64.2/1001 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI8.9/1001 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
52
GLM 4.5 only
8
GPT-4.1 Nano only
17
Like-for-like categories
8 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 64.2 from 1 benchmark, GPT-4.1 Nano 8.9 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Math, 35.2 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
AIME: GLM 4.5 86.7% against GPT-4.1 Nano 26.5%, 60.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 $2.20 against GPT-4.1 Nano $0.40 per million output tokens, 5.5x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 takes 131K tokens, GPT-4.1 Nano 1.05M.

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 4.5BarsGPT-4.1 NanoTies
Coding60
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning60
Math70
Knowledge100
Web design60
General150
All shared boards520
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured8.9%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SWE-bench Verified64.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured11.1Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)67.5%42.7%GLM 4.5
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)73.8%32.6%GLM 4.5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%3.8%GLM 4.5
WeirdML40.6%19.0%GLM 4.5
ALE-Bench344.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding14341306GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: software and IT14401305GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.87.8GLM 4.5
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured129.5Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom43.0%17.3%GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
GPQA Diamond72.2%50.8%GLM 4.5
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured55.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.2%51.2%GLM 4.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%3.8%GLM 4.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured48.9%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
ARC-AGINot measured0.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured0.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14291286GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: expert14331271GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14291293GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AIME86.7%26.5%GLM 4.5
MATH 500 (Vals AI)94.0%80.2%GLM 4.5
MGSM (Vals AI)90.8%69.3%GLM 4.5
AA Math Index73.724.0GLM 4.5
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.7%24.0%GLM 4.5
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured28.9%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MATH level 5Not measured70.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math14271274GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work14301274GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index100
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
MMLU Pro81.2%63.5%GLM 4.5
LegalBench (Vals AI)75.6%61.1%GLM 4.5
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.0%42.1%GLM 4.5
TaxEval (Vals AI)72.4%60.8%GLM 4.5
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured52.8%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)90.0%68.2%GLM 4.5
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)83.5%65.7%GLM 4.5
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured6.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science14441297GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14551276GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: legal and government14381300GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14201267GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websites1170973GLM 4.5
Design Arena: UI components1144916GLM 4.5
Design Arena: game dev1145971GLM 4.5
Design Arena: data viz1159891GLM 4.5
Design Arena: 3D1170925GLM 4.5
Design Arena: all code categories1165963GLM 4.5
Design Arena: SVG1096Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index150
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
IFBench44.1%32.0%GLM 4.5
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%20.3%GLM 4.5
DTBenchNot measured52.5%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMCANot measured5.5%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured25.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)73.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text14301285GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: instruction following14041266GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: creative writing13951260GLM 4.5
LMArena VisionNot measured1063Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English14371303GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: non-English14171260GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Chinese14651270GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: German14071288GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Japanese14151198GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Korean1380Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: French1418Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1454Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14131261GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Polish1422Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14151277GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: longer queries14121283GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: writing and language14031261GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14041243GLM 4.5
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1101Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 4.5GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
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$0.0017Fits in one request
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0062Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.142Exceeds the context window
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.024Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano 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 and GPT-4.1 Nano
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5OpenAI GPT-4.1 Nano
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025April 14, 2025
Context window131K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.10
Output $/Mtok$2.20$0.40
Coding index64.28.9
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 better than GPT-4.1 Nano for coding?

Pick GLM 4.5 for coding: it scores 64.2 on the Vibe Coding Index against 8.9 for GPT-4.1 Nano. Pick GPT-4.1 Nano when output tokens cost 5.5x less, or when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 131K tokens.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 or GPT-4.1 Nano?

GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.10 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 or GPT-4.1 Nano?

GPT-4.1 Nano, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 vs GPT-4.1 Nano comparison based on?

52 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.5's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-4.1 Nano's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next