LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.1 vs Llama 4 Scout

Updated October 21, 2026. 55 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 Llama 4 Scout
GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
44.0
Overall
26.1
Output $/M
$4.40
55
Llama 4 ScoutMeta Llama
Coding
9.1
Overall
6.5
Output $/M
$0.30
0
vs boards won of 55 shared

Decision reading

Pick GLM 5.1 for coding: it scores 44.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 9.1 for Llama 4 Scout.

Pick Llama 4 Scout when output tokens cost 14.7x less, or when the context window is larger, 1.31M against 205K tokens.

Model AGLM 5.1Z.ai44.0/1001 independent benchmark$0.60 per solved taskModel BLlama 4 ScoutMeta Llama9.1/1001 independent benchmark$1.276 per solved task
Shared results
55
GLM 5.1 only
34
Llama 4 Scout only
25
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, Llama 4 Scout 9.1 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Web design, 62.6 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GLM 5.1 93.3% against Llama 4 Scout 7.8%, 85.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.1 $4.40 against Llama 4 Scout $0.30 per million output tokens, 14.7x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.1 takes 205K tokens, Llama 4 Scout 1.31M.

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 5.1BarsLlama 4 ScoutTies
Coding60
Intelligence20
Agentic work20
Reasoning70
Math40
Knowledge90
Web design50
General200
All shared boards550
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured9.1%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena WebDev1508Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
AA Coding Index55.88.2GLM 5.1
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.4%38.5%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 measured29.9%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
SciCode44.8%21.3%GLM 5.1
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.2%1.5%GLM 5.1
WeirdML57.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
ALE-Bench887.1Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding14851286GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14841286GLM 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 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
AA Intelligence Index26.16.5GLM 5.1
Epoch Capabilities Index149.8129.6GLM 5.1
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
AA Agentic Index23.90.5GLM 5.1
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 apps1162Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1186Not 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 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%15.5%GLM 5.1
APEX-Agents40.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,634Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
GPQA Diamond84.5%47.0%GLM 5.1
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured58.8%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.8%58.7%GLM 5.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)30.1%3.8%GLM 5.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)89.9%51.8%GLM 5.1
ARC-AGINot measured0.5%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.0%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
SimpleBench55.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Chess puzzles20.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14731266GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: expert14781235GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14821293GLM 5.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1125Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1148Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
AIME91.9%19.0%GLM 5.1
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured79.2%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured88.0%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
AA Math IndexNot measured14.0Only Llama 4 Scout measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured14.0%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
OTIS Mock AIME93.3%7.8%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 measured62.3%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Text: math14731287GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work14701286GLM 5.1
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 Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
MMLU Pro86.9%69.6%GLM 5.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.4%72.0%GLM 5.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)64.5%46.8%GLM 5.1
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.2%55.2%GLM 5.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured57.8%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured50.9%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.6%23.3%GLM 5.1
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured75.2%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
SimpleQA Verified34.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: science14781278GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14741275GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14651285GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14521257GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
Design Arena: websites1290750GLM 5.1
Design Arena: UI components1292767GLM 5.1
Design Arena: game dev1265773GLM 5.1
Design Arena: data viz1366896GLM 5.1
Design Arena: 3D1336Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1268790GLM 5.1
Design Arena: SVG1217Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1142Not 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 index200
General benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured34.8%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)72.3%50.6%GLM 5.1
IFBench76.3%39.5%GLM 5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.7%27.7%GLM 5.1
DTBenchNot measured57.9%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMCANot measured12.0%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured36.0%Only Llama 4 Scout measured
ExploitBench18.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text14631279GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14531248GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14531249GLM 5.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1118Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Text: English14761304GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: non-English14481252GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Chinese15151255GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: German14671273GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Japanese14351206GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Korean14241207GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: French14701283GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Spanish14681278GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Russian14541263GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: Polish14491265GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: multi-turn14731280GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14671265GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14541269GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14421242GLM 5.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1143Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1106Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1117Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1102Only Llama 4 Scout measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1126Only Llama 4 Scout measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 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 Llama 4 Scout
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Llama 4 ScoutLeader
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
Llama 4 Scout$0.0003Fits in one request

Llama 4 Scout costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.1$0.083Fits in one request
Llama 4 Scout$0.0059Fits in one request

Llama 4 Scout costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.1$0.324Exceeds the context window
Llama 4 Scout$0.023Fits in one request

Llama 4 Scout 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 Llama 4 Scout
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.1Meta Llama 4 Scout
MakerZ.aiMeta Llama
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 7, 2026April 5, 2025
Context window205K1.31M
Input $/Mtok$1.40$0.10
Output $/Mtok$4.40$0.30
Coding index44.09.1
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved task$0.60$1.276
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.1 better than Llama 4 Scout for coding?

Pick GLM 5.1 for coding: it scores 44.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 9.1 for Llama 4 Scout. Pick Llama 4 Scout when output tokens cost 14.7x less, or when the context window is larger, 1.31M against 205K tokens.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or Llama 4 Scout?

GLM 5.1 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Llama 4 Scout costs $0.10 and $0.30. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GLM 5.1 costs $0.60 and Llama 4 Scout $1.276.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.1 or Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout, with 1.31M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.1 vs Llama 4 Scout comparison based on?

55 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Llama 4 Scout's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next