Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 vs gpt-oss-20b

GLM 4.5 leads gpt-oss-20b on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.8 to 10.0, and gpt-oss-20b costs 14.7x less per output token ($0.15 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 52 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 4.5 Replace gpt-oss-20b
GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
12.8
Output $/M
$2.20
43
gpt-oss-20bOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
10.0
Output $/M
$0.15
9
vs boards won of 52 shared

GLM 4.5 or gpt-oss-20b: which to pick

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

Pick GLM 4.5 for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) or LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Model AGLM 4.5Z.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel Bgpt-oss-20bOpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
52
GLM 4.5 only
8
gpt-oss-20b only
8
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
GLM 4.5 not benchmarked, gpt-oss-20b not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 34.0 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: websites: GLM 4.5 1170 against gpt-oss-20b 852, 39.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 $2.20 against gpt-oss-20b $0.15 per million output tokens, 14.7x apart.
Context window
Both take 131K tokens.

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-oss-20bTies
Coding34
Intelligence10
Agentic work01
Reasoning60
Math43
Knowledge100
Web design20
General171
All shared boards439
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index34
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and gpt-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
SWE-bench Verified64.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)67.5%80.4%gpt-oss-20b
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)73.8%77.7%gpt-oss-20b
SciCodeNot measured38.9%Only gpt-oss-20b measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%10.6%GLM 4.5
Terminal-BenchNot measured3.4%Only gpt-oss-20b measured
WeirdML40.6%40.9%gpt-oss-20b
ALE-Bench344.8566.0gpt-oss-20b
LMArena Text: coding14341307GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: software and IT14401311GLM 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-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.810.0GLM 4.5
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured137.7Only gpt-oss-20b measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and gpt-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom43.0%60.2%gpt-oss-20b
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-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
GPQA Diamond72.2%68.9%GLM 4.5
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.2%68.8%GLM 4.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%11.0%GLM 4.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured60.8%Only gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14291274GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: expert14331258GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14291292GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index43
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and gpt-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
AIME86.7%86.0%GLM 4.5
MATH 500 (Vals AI)94.0%94.2%gpt-oss-20b
MGSM (Vals AI)90.8%89.0%GLM 4.5
AA Math Index73.789.3gpt-oss-20b
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.7%89.3%gpt-oss-20b
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured65.3%Only gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: math14271317GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work14301305GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index100
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and gpt-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
MMLU Pro81.2%71.6%GLM 4.5
LegalBench (Vals AI)75.6%70.8%GLM 4.5
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured43.8%Only gpt-oss-20b measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.0%53.1%GLM 4.5
TaxEval (Vals AI)72.4%63.7%GLM 4.5
MedQA (Vals AI)90.0%82.9%GLM 4.5
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)83.5%74.8%GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: science14441296GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14551310GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: legal and government14381280GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14201284GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and gpt-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
Design Arena: websites1170852GLM 4.5
Design Arena: UI components1144Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1145Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1159933GLM 4.5
Design Arena: 3D1170Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1165Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
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 index171
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and gpt-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
IFBench44.1%65.1%gpt-oss-20b
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%34.7%GLM 4.5
DTBenchNot measured68.0%Only gpt-oss-20b measured
LMCANot measured14.5%Only gpt-oss-20b measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)73.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text14301288GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: instruction following14041236GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: creative writing13951201GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: English14371303GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: non-English14171269GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Chinese14651315GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: German14071255GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Japanese14151244GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Korean13801236GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: French1418Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish14541267GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Russian14131278GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Polish14221252GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn14151268GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: longer queries14121250GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: writing and language14031238GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14041216GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 24 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-oss-20b
BenchmarkGLM 4.5gpt-oss-20bLeader
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-oss-20b$0.0001Fits in one request

gpt-oss-20b costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request
gpt-oss-20b$0.0019Fits in one request

gpt-oss-20b costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.142Exceeds the context window
gpt-oss-20b$0.0075Exceeds the context window

gpt-oss-20b 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-oss-20b
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5OpenAI gpt-oss-20b
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025August 5, 2025
Context window131K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.03
Output $/Mtok$2.20$0.15
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 better than gpt-oss-20b for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) or LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 or gpt-oss-20b?

GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; gpt-oss-20b costs $0.03 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 or gpt-oss-20b?

Neither: both take 131K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 vs gpt-oss-20b comparison based on?

52 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.5's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and gpt-oss-20b's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next