LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.1 vs GPT-5.4

Updated October 21, 2026. 77 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace GLM 5.1 Replace GPT-5.4
GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
44.0
Overall
26.1
Output $/M
$4.40
23
GPT-5.4OpenAI
Coding
37.7
Overall
39.0
Output $/M
$15.00
54
vs boards won of 77 shared

Decision reading

Pick GLM 5.1 for coding: it scores 44.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 37.7 for GPT-5.4.

Pick GPT-5.4 when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 205K tokens, or when what matters is AA Coding Index or LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Model AGLM 5.1Z.ai44.0/1001 independent benchmark$0.60 per solved taskModel BGPT-5.4OpenAI37.7/1001 independent benchmark$1.02 per solved task
Shared results
77
GLM 5.1 only
12
GPT-5.4 only
32
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 5.1 44.0 from 1 benchmark, GPT-5.4 37.7 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Math, 15.3 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3: GLM 5.1 36.8% against GPT-5.4 78.6%, 41.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.1 $4.40 against GPT-5.4 $15.00 per million output tokens, 3.4x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.1 takes 205K tokens, GPT-5.4 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-5.4Ties
Coding311
Intelligence02
Agentic work53
Reasoning17
Math06
Knowledge29
Web design71
General515
All shared boards2354
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index311
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
LMArena WebDev15081464GLM 5.1
AA Coding Index55.871.1GPT-5.4
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.4%84.1%GPT-5.4
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)76.4%78.2%GPT-5.4
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)31.5%67.4%GPT-5.4
Code migration (Vals AI)25.8%35.0%GPT-5.4
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%0.5%GPT-5.4
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)56.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured51.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
SciCode44.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.2%57.6%GPT-5.4
Terminal-BenchNot measured81.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured31.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
WeirdML57.1%77.7%GPT-5.4
MirrorCodeNot measured15.6%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ALE-Bench887.11607.0GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: coding14851496GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: software and IT14841491GPT-5.4
LMArena WebDev: React15051454GLM 5.1
LMArena WebDev: HTML15081478GLM 5.1
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1436Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
AA Intelligence Index26.139.0GPT-5.4
Epoch Capabilities Index149.8157.3GPT-5.4
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index53
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
AA Agentic Index23.9Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps11751059GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps11671017GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps11621087GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building Android apps11861037GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building Godot games10531135GPT-5.4
Design Arena: agents building games1164Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1170Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1189Not 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%87.1%GLM 5.1
APEX-Agents40.9%52.4%GPT-5.4
METR time horizonsNot measured74.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured35.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
PostTrainBenchNot measured19.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,634$6,144GPT-5.4
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
GPQA Diamond84.5%91.7%GPT-5.4
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured87.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.8%92.0%GPT-5.4
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)30.1%43.7%GPT-5.4
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)89.9%93.3%GPT-5.4
ARC-AGINot measured93.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured74.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
SimpleBench55.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Chess puzzles20.0%48.0%GPT-5.4
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured37.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
EBR-benchNot measured25.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14731485GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: expert14781507GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14821479GLM 5.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1327Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1336Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
AIME91.9%96.7%GPT-5.4
OTIS Mock AIME93.3%97.8%GPT-5.4
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 336.8%78.6%GPT-5.4
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured49.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ProofBench22.2%56.0%GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: math14731488GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: mathematical work14701497GPT-5.4
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index29
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
MMLU Pro86.9%87.5%GPT-5.4
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.4%86.0%GPT-5.4
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.5%63.8%GPT-5.4
CorpFin (Vals AI)64.5%65.3%GPT-5.4
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.2%74.0%GPT-5.4
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured96.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.6%41.3%GLM 5.1
SimpleQA Verified34.0%45.1%GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: science14781479GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14741458GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14651486GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: business and finance14521474GPT-5.4
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index71
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
Design Arena: websites12901199GLM 5.1
Design Arena: UI components12921215GLM 5.1
Design Arena: game dev12651195GLM 5.1
Design Arena: data viz13661196GLM 5.1
Design Arena: 3D13361065GLM 5.1
Design Arena: all code categories12681180GLM 5.1
Design Arena: SVG12171141GLM 5.1
Design Arena: ASCII art11421188GPT-5.4
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index515
General benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured43.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)72.3%77.5%GPT-5.4
IFBench76.3%73.9%GLM 5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.7%82.0%GPT-5.4
DTBenchNot measured94.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMCANot measured52.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CL-benchNot measured27.9%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured37.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ExploitBench18.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured21.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text14631469GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: instruction following14531469GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: creative writing14531439GLM 5.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1303Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: English14761467GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: non-English14481465GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: Chinese15151520GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: German14671472GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: Japanese14351485GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: Korean14241449GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: French14701493GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: Spanish14681452GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Russian14541480GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: Polish14491472GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: multi-turn14731482GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: longer queries14671473GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: writing and language14541458GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14421438GLM 5.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1301Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1354Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1312Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1284Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1251Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1283Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1471Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 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-5.4
BenchmarkGLM 5.1GPT-5.4Leader
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 5.1$0.0036Fits in one request
GPT-5.4$0.010Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.1$0.083Fits in one request
GPT-5.4$0.170Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.1$0.324Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.4$0.650Fits in one request

GLM 5.1 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-5.4
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.1OpenAI GPT-5.4
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 7, 2026March 5, 2026
Context window205K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$1.40$2.50
Output $/Mtok$4.40$15.00
Coding index44.037.7
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved task$0.60$1.02
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.1 better than GPT-5.4 for coding?

Pick GLM 5.1 for coding: it scores 44.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 37.7 for GPT-5.4. Pick GPT-5.4 when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 205K tokens, or when what matters is AA Coding Index or LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or GPT-5.4?

GLM 5.1 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 costs $2.50 and $15.00. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GLM 5.1 costs $0.60 and GPT-5.4 $1.02.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.1 or GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.1 vs GPT-5.4 comparison based on?

77 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-5.4's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next