Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.1 vs GPT-4.1 Nano

GLM 5.1 leads GPT-4.1 Nano on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.1 to 7.8, and GPT-4.1 Nano costs 11.0x less per output token ($0.40 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 51 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 5.1 Replace GPT-4.1 Nano
GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
49.2
Overall
57.5
Output $/M
$4.40
51
GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
24.7
Output $/M
$0.40
0
vs boards won of 51 shared

GLM 5.1 or GPT-4.1 Nano: which to pick

Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4.1 Nano has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4.1 Nano for output tokens 11.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $4.40 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 205K tokens).

Model AGLM 5.1Z.ai49.2/1003 independent benchmarks$0.60 per solved taskModel BGPT-4.1 NanoOpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
51
GLM 5.1 only
40
GPT-4.1 Nano only
20
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 5.1 49.2 from 3 benchmarks, GPT-4.1 Nano not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 80.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GLM 5.1 97.7% against GPT-4.1 Nano 17.3%, 80.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.1 $4.40 against GPT-4.1 Nano $0.40 per million output tokens, 11.0x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.1 takes 205K 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 5.1BarsGPT-4.1 NanoTies
Coding60
Intelligence20
Agentic work10
Reasoning80
Math40
Knowledge90
Web design60
General150
All shared boards510
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured8.9%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena WebDev1508Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
AA Coding Index55.811.1GLM 5.1
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.4%42.7%GLM 5.1
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)76.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)31.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)25.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)56.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured32.6%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SciCode44.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.2%3.8%GLM 5.1
WeirdML57.1%19.0%GLM 5.1
ALE-Bench887.1Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding14851306GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14841305GLM 5.1
LMArena WebDev: React1505Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1508Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence Index26.17.8GLM 5.1
Epoch Capabilities Index149.8129.5GLM 5.1
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AA Agentic Index23.9Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1175Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1167Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1160Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1181Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1053Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1164Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1109Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1162Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1315Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)44.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)27.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom97.7%17.3%GLM 5.1
APEX-Agents40.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,634Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured33.1%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MCP Atlas75.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index80
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
GPQA Diamond84.5%50.8%GLM 5.1
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured55.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.8%51.2%GLM 5.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)30.1%3.8%GLM 5.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)89.9%48.9%GLM 5.1
ARC-AGINot measured0.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SimpleBench55.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Chess puzzles20.0%0.0%GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts14731286GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: expert14781271GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14821293GLM 5.1
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured33.3%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AIME91.9%26.5%GLM 5.1
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured80.2%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured69.3%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AA Math IndexNot measured24.0Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured24.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME93.3%28.9%GLM 5.1
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 336.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
ProofBench22.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
MATH level 5Not measured70.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math14731274GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work14701274GLM 5.1
MathArena20.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index90
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
MMLU Pro86.9%63.5%GLM 5.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.4%61.1%GLM 5.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)64.5%42.1%GLM 5.1
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.2%60.8%GLM 5.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured52.8%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured68.2%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured65.7%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified34.0%6.0%GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: science14781297GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14741276GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14651300GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14521267GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websites1290973GLM 5.1
Design Arena: UI components1292913GLM 5.1
Design Arena: game dev1264970GLM 5.1
Design Arena: data viz1366891GLM 5.1
Design Arena: 3D1336924GLM 5.1
Design Arena: all code categories1268962GLM 5.1
Design Arena: SVG1217Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1141Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index150
General benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)72.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
IFBench76.3%32.0%GLM 5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.7%20.3%GLM 5.1
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
ExploitBench18.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text14631285GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14531266GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14531260GLM 5.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1063Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English14761303GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: non-English14481260GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Chinese15151270GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: German14671288GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Japanese14351198GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Korean1424Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1470Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1468Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14541261GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Polish1449Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14731277GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14671283GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14541261GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14421243GLM 5.1
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 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-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 5.1$0.0036Fits 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 5.1$0.083Fits 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 5.1$0.324Exceeds 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 5.1 and GPT-4.1 Nano
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.1OpenAI GPT-4.1 Nano
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 7, 2026April 14, 2025
Context window205K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$1.40$0.10
Output $/Mtok$4.40$0.40
Coding index49.2Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.60Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.1 better than GPT-4.1 Nano for coding?

Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4.1 Nano has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4.1 Nano for output tokens 11.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $4.40 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or GPT-4.1 Nano?

GLM 5.1 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.10 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.1 or GPT-4.1 Nano?

GPT-4.1 Nano, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.1 vs GPT-4.1 Nano comparison based on?

51 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 5.1's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and GPT-4.1 Nano's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next