Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.6 vs GPT-4 Turbo

GLM 4.6 leads GPT-4 Turbo on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.5 to 7.0, and GLM 4.6 costs 13.6x less per output token ($2.20 vs $30.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.6Z.ai
Coding
8.8
Overall
33.4
Output $/M
$2.20
34
GPT-4 TurboOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$30.00
1
vs boards won of 35 shared

GLM 4.6 or GPT-4 Turbo: which to pick

Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4 Turbo has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4 Turbo for work measured by LegalBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
35
GLM 4.6 only
34
GPT-4 Turbo only
7
Like-for-like categories
6 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 4.6 8.8 from 2 benchmarks, GPT-4 Turbo not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 31.5 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Chinese: GLM 4.6 1499 against GPT-4 Turbo 1242, 42.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.6 $2.20 against GPT-4 Turbo $30.00 per million output tokens, 13.6x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.6 takes 205K tokens, GPT-4 Turbo 128K.

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 4.6BarsGPT-4 TurboTies
Coding40
Intelligence10
Reasoning40
Math20
Knowledge61
General170
All shared boards341
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
SWE-bench Verified68.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev1341Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Coding Index45.821.5GLM 4.6
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)3.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)69.5%29.1%GLM 4.6
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)28.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Terminal-Bench24.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
ALE-Bench340.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: coding14491268GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: software and IT14551267GLM 4.6
LMArena WebDev: HTML1350Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
AA Intelligence Index18.57.0GLM 4.6
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured127.3Only GPT-4 Turbo measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1029Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1096Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1084Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1180Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)72.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
BrowseComp-Plus48.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
GPQA Diamond74.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)14.5%3.1%GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: hard prompts14401251GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: expert14321223GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14451266GLM 4.6
Kagi LLM Benchmark45.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
AIME92.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Math Index86.0Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: math14321272GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: mathematical work14471268GLM 4.6
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
MMLU Pro82.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)79.6%80.5%GPT-4 Turbo
CorpFin (Vals AI)56.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)92.2%82.0%GLM 4.6
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)82.9%69.4%GLM 4.6
MMLUNot measured81.3%Only GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: science14561256GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14551239GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: legal and government14481265GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: business and finance14161222GLM 4.6
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
Design Arena: websites1174Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: UI components1145Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: game dev1150Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: data viz1161Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: 3D1128Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1165Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: SVG1108Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index170
General benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
IFBench43.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)54.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
DTBenchNot measured61.6%Only GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMCANot measured9.8%Only GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text14401272GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: instruction following14101249GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: creative writing14121268GLM 4.6
LMArena VisionNot measured1090Only GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: English14491291GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: non-English14261245GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Chinese14991242GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: German14471259GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Japanese13931194GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Korean14001187GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: French14591276GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Spanish14361260GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Russian14181259GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Polish14471302GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: multi-turn14271267GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: longer queries14221254GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: writing and language14151279GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14091258GLM 4.6
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1097Only GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1045Only GPT-4 Turbo 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 GLM 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
BenchmarkGLM 4.6GPT-4 TurboLeader
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 4.6$0.0017Fits in one request
GPT-4 Turbo$0.025Fits in one request

GLM 4.6 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.037Fits in one request
GPT-4 Turbo$0.590Fits in one request

GLM 4.6 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.142Exceeds the context window
GPT-4 Turbo$2.30Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.6 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 4.6 and GPT-4 Turbo
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.6OpenAI GPT-4 Turbo
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 30, 2025April 9, 2024
Context window205K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$10.00
Output $/Mtok$2.20$30.00
Coding index8.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.6 better than GPT-4 Turbo for coding?

Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4 Turbo has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4 Turbo for work measured by LegalBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.6 or GPT-4 Turbo?

GLM 4.6 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; GPT-4 Turbo costs $10.00 and $30.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.6 or GPT-4 Turbo?

GLM 4.6, with 205K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.6 vs GPT-4 Turbo comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.6's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and GPT-4 Turbo's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next