Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5 vs GPT-5.4 Nano

GPT-5.4 Nano leads GLM 5 on coding, 44.8 to 41.7 on the Vibe Coding Index, and GPT-5.4 Nano costs 2.6x less per output token ($1.25 vs $3.20 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 53 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 5 Replace GPT-5.4 Nano
GLM 5Z.ai
Coding
41.7
Overall
54.3
Output $/M
$3.20
43
GPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI
Coding
44.8
Overall
45.7
Output $/M
$1.25
10
vs boards won of 53 shared

GLM 5 or GPT-5.4 Nano: which to pick

Pick GPT-5.4 Nano for coding: it scores 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 41.7 for GLM 5, though on 2 benchmarks against 3.

Pick GLM 5 for work measured by SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Model AGLM 5Z.ai41.7/1003 independent benchmarks$0.63 per solved taskModel BGPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI44.8/1002 independent benchmarks$0.14 per solved task
Shared results
53
GLM 5 only
23
GPT-5.4 Nano only
32
Like-for-like categories
7 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 41.7 from 3 benchmarks, GPT-5.4 Nano 44.8 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 22.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Kagi LLM Benchmark: GLM 5 75.0% against GPT-5.4 Nano 39.7%, 35.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5 $3.20 against GPT-5.4 Nano $1.25 per million output tokens, 2.6x apart.
Context window
GLM 5 takes 205K tokens, GPT-5.4 Nano 400K.

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 5BarsGPT-5.4 NanoTies
Coding44
Intelligence11
Agentic work10
Reasoning82
Math31
Knowledge90
General172
All shared boards4310
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index44
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 NanoLeader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual69.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena WebDev1435Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured56.1Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.9%84.0%GPT-5.4 Nano
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)71.4%69.8%GLM 5
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)23.4%26.1%GPT-5.4 Nano
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured14.5%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured41.6%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SciCodeNot measured47.2%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.2%42.4%GLM 5
Terminal-Bench52.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
WeirdML48.2%49.2%GPT-5.4 Nano
ALE-Bench765.61004.5GPT-5.4 Nano
LMArena Text: coding14611404GLM 5
LMArena Text: software and IT14601402GLM 5
LMArena WebDev: React1424Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1450Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence Index27.920.7GLM 5
Epoch Capabilities Index145.8146.0GPT-5.4 Nano
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 NanoLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured16.0Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1123Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1136Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1146Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1144Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1148Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured38.2%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured5.0%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured6.3%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured44.8%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
τ²-Bench Telecom98.2%76.0%GLM 5
Vending-Bench 2$4,432Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index82
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 NanoLeader
GPQA Diamond83.3%77.5%GLM 5
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured73.6%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)82.0%81.7%GLM 5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)29.3%28.3%GLM 5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)87.8%78.5%GLM 5
ARC-AGI44.7%51.5%GPT-5.4 Nano
ARC-AGI-24.9%5.7%GPT-5.4 Nano
SimpleBench53.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured45.0%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured9.0%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14521381GLM 5
LMArena Text: expert14541396GLM 5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14601387GLM 5
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1210Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1225Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark75.0%39.7%GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
Math benchmarks for GLM 5 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 NanoLeader
AIME91.7%88.8%GLM 5
OTIS Mock AIME80.0%87.8%GPT-5.4 Nano
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured44.9%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured12.2%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ProofBenchNot measured5.0%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math14401405GLM 5
LMArena Text: mathematical work14511409GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index90
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 NanoLeader
MMLU Pro86.0%77.2%GLM 5
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.1%77.9%GLM 5
CaseLaw (Vals AI)52.5%51.9%GLM 5
CorpFin (Vals AI)62.9%61.2%GLM 5
TaxEval (Vals AI)70.0%67.4%GLM 5
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured59.1%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)94.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured41.0%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured11.7%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science14601374GLM 5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14551369GLM 5
LMArena Text: legal and government14531368GLM 5
LMArena Text: business and finance14301366GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websites1247Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1230Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1234Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1228Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1229Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1246Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1168Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1147Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index172
General benchmarks for GLM 5 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 NanoLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured38.1%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured77.1%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured47.6%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
IFBench72.3%75.9%GPT-5.4 Nano
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)75.7%76.7%GPT-5.4 Nano
DTBenchNot measured80.3%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMCANot measured36.9%Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
CL-bench18.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text14461372GLM 5
LMArena Text: instruction following14281362GLM 5
LMArena Text: creative writing14381315GLM 5
LMArena VisionNot measured1196Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English14581381GLM 5
LMArena Text: non-English14301359GLM 5
LMArena Text: Chinese15111391GLM 5
LMArena Text: German14471368GLM 5
LMArena Text: Japanese14161343GLM 5
LMArena Text: Korean14231321GLM 5
LMArena Text: French14561395GLM 5
LMArena Text: Spanish14541371GLM 5
LMArena Text: Russian14361363GLM 5
LMArena Text: Polish14341366GLM 5
LMArena Text: multi-turn14561382GLM 5
LMArena Text: longer queries14461365GLM 5
LMArena Text: writing and language14371338GLM 5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14261325GLM 5
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1202Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1232Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1204Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1161Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1141Only GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1159Only GPT-5.4 Nano 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 and GPT-5.4 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5GPT-5.4 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$0.0026Fits in one request
GPT-5.4 Nano$0.0008Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5$0.060Fits in one request
GPT-5.4 Nano$0.014Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5$0.232Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.4 Nano$0.052Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 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 and GPT-5.4 Nano
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5OpenAI GPT-5.4 Nano
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedFebruary 11, 2026March 17, 2026
Context window205K400K
Input $/Mtok$1.00$0.20
Output $/Mtok$3.20$1.25
Coding index41.744.8
Independent measurements behind it32
Cost per solved task$0.63$0.14
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5 better than GPT-5.4 Nano for coding?

Pick GPT-5.4 Nano for coding: it scores 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 41.7 for GLM 5, though on 2 benchmarks against 3. Pick GLM 5 for work measured by SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5 or GPT-5.4 Nano?

GLM 5 costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 Nano costs $0.20 and $1.25. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GLM 5 costs $0.63 and GPT-5.4 Nano $0.14.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5 or GPT-5.4 Nano?

GPT-5.4 Nano, with 400K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5 vs GPT-5.4 Nano comparison based on?

53 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.4 Nano'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-vs-gpt-5-4-nano" title="GLM 5 vs GPT-5.4 Nano, 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-vs-gpt-5-4-nano">LLMBenchmark.ai, GLM 5 vs GPT-5.4 Nano</a></p>