Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol

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 5.3 Replace GPT-6.1 Sol
GLM 5.3Z.ai
Coding
73.1
Overall
44.8
Output $/M
$1.40
32
GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI
Coding
88.7
Overall
51.8
Output $/M
$10.00
45
vs boards won of 77 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for coding: it scores 88.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 73.1 for GLM 5.3.

Pick GLM 5.3 when output tokens cost 7.1x less, or when what matters is CyberBench (Vals AI) or SciCode, where it leads.

Model AGLM 5.3Z.ai73.1/1002 independent benchmarks$0.36 per solved taskModel BGPT-6.1 SolOpenAI88.7/1002 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task
Shared results
77
GLM 5.3 only
23
GPT-6.1 Sol only
18
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 5.3 73.1 from 2 benchmarks, GPT-6.1 Sol 88.7 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 26.4 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LiveBench browser: GLM 5.3 0.0% against GPT-6.1 Sol 88.0%, 88.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.3 $1.40 against GPT-6.1 Sol $10.00 per million output tokens, 7.1x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.3 takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-6.1 Sol 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 5.3BarsGPT-6.1 SolTies
Coding411
Intelligence02
Agentic work57
Reasoning36
Math15
Knowledge42
Web design07
General155
All shared boards3245
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index411
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
LiveBench coding82.8%96.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev16211753GPT-6.1 Sol
AA Coding Index74.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)80.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)95.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)38.9%55.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)78.1%88.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
Code migration (Vals AI)44.2%65.1%GPT-6.1 Sol
ProgramBench (Vals AI)1.5%3.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
IOI (Vals AI)68.4%96.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)71.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)Not measured43.5%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)20.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)47.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)72.1%39.3%GLM 5.3
SciCode59.0%55.8%GLM 5.3
FrontierCode40.1%50.2%GPT-6.1 Sol
FrontierSWE30.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
WeirdML75.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
ALE-Bench1317.42743.8GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: coding14971478GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: software and IT14931476GLM 5.3
LMArena WebDev: React16411754GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev: HTML15951800GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1702Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
AA Intelligence Index44.851.8GPT-6.1 Sol
Epoch Capabilities Index156.0168.4GPT-6.1 Sol
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index57
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
AA Agentic Index53.1Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps11941190GLM 5.3
Design Arena: HTML slides1189Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1255Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1250Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench research73.2%83.5%GPT-6.1 Sol
LiveBench browser0.0%88.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
LiveBench long agentic35.9%73.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
SREBench (Vals AI)9.2%50.8%GPT-6.1 Sol
Finance Agent (Vals AI)55.8%52.0%GLM 5.3
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)39.7%21.8%GLM 5.3
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)49.0%38.5%GLM 5.3
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)14.6%6.3%GLM 5.3
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)56.3%70.8%GPT-6.1 Sol
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)Not measured79.6%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)5.7%52.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
Vals Science IndexNot measured59.6%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)Not measured28.3%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
APEX-Agents56.6%60.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
SpireClimbNot measured24.7%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vending-Bench 2$8,164Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index36
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
GPQA Diamond88.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench reasoning85.8%92.6%GPT-6.1 Sol
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)23.0%46.4%GPT-6.1 Sol
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.3%52.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.9%95.4%GPT-6.1 Sol
ARC-AGINot measured98.5%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured94.2%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Chess puzzles37.0%68.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
Mystery game puzzles33.0%80.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
EBR-benchNot measured54.3%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14901463GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: expert15141489GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14961465GLM 5.3
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1306Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1356Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
OTIS Mock AIME91.1%100.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 368.8%93.7%GPT-6.1 Sol
FrontierMath, tier 429.3%100.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
ProofBench49.0%99.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: math14951489GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: mathematical work14971513GPT-6.1 Sol
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index42
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
MMLU Pro86.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)42.9%48.8%GPT-6.1 Sol
SimpleQA Verified41.0%73.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: science14981444GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14811433GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: legal and government14731471GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: business and finance14591445GLM 5.3
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
Design Arena: websites12951321GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: UI components13141321GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: game dev13111389GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: data viz12601278GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: 3D13321461GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: all code categories13041345GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: SVG1292Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1213Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench design77.3%82.1%GPT-6.1 Sol
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index155
General benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
Vals Index59.7%63.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
LiveBench data analysis70.2%82.7%GPT-6.1 Sol
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)68.5%59.3%GLM 5.3
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured46.5%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)88.8%86.5%GLM 5.3
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)79.7%84.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
DTBench87.7%96.5%GPT-6.1 Sol
LMCA55.5%62.8%GPT-6.1 Sol
Furniture assemblyNot measured80.0%Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text14741443GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: instruction following14791466GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: creative writing14581425GLM 5.3
LMArena VisionNot measured1288Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: English14821450GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: non-English14591433GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: Chinese15321487GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: German1488Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1460Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1460Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: French15031460GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: Spanish14621439GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: Russian14691457GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: Polish1466Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14721442GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: longer queries14831458GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: writing and language14691444GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14471426GLM 5.3
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1274Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1289Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1301Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
BenchmarkGLM 5.3GPT-6.1 SolLeader
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 5.3$0.0008Fits in one request
GPT-6.1 Sol$0.0070Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.3$0.0081Fits in one request
GPT-6.1 Sol$0.130Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.3$0.030Fits in one request
GPT-6.1 Sol$0.500Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 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 5.3 and GPT-6.1 Sol
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.3OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 18, 2026September 29, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.079$2.00
Output $/Mtok$1.40$10.00
Coding index73.188.7
Independent measurements behind it22
Cost per solved task$0.36Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.3 better than GPT-6.1 Sol for coding?

Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for coding: it scores 88.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 73.1 for GLM 5.3. Pick GLM 5.3 when output tokens cost 7.1x less, or when what matters is CyberBench (Vals AI) or SciCode, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 or GPT-6.1 Sol?

GLM 5.3 costs $0.079 per million input tokens and $1.40 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2.00 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.3 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.3 or GPT-6.1 Sol?

GPT-6.1 Sol, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol comparison based on?

77 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5.3's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and GPT-6.1 Sol's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/glm-5-3-vs-gpt-6-1-sol" title="GLM 5.3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/glm-5-3-vs-gpt-6-1-sol">LLMBenchmark.ai, GLM 5.3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol</a></p>