Model comparison

Claude 2.1 vs GLM-4.5

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude 2.1 Anthropic

25.2

Rank #345 Reported

GLM-4.5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #122 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.5 in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.5 leads 39.0 to 10.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 7.1% for Claude 2.1 and 40.6% for GLM-4.5.
  • GLM-4.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 2.1 and GLM-4.5 specifications
Claude 2.1GLM-4.5
ProviderAnthropicZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index25.242.0
Released2023-11-212025-07-27
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—98K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.60
Output $ / M tokens—$2.20
Results tracked727

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.5 leads

Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1GLM-4.5
WeirdML7.1%40.6%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—54.2%
LMArena Coding—1434
ALE-Bench—344.82
AlgoTune—1.52

Reasoning GLM-4.5 leads

Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1GLM-4.5
Kagi LLM Benchmark—57.9%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1429
DTBench51%—
Epoch Capabilities Index119.27—
ForecastBench54.2—

Math GLM-4.5 leads

Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1GLM-4.5
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.9%—
LMArena Math—1427

Knowledge GLM-4.5 leads

Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1GLM-4.5
GPQA Diamond33%—
Humanity's Last Exam—8.3%
Confabulations—11.3%
LMArena Expert—1433
MMLU73.5%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1GLM-4.5
LMArena Non-English—1417
LMArena Chinese—1465
LMArena French—1418
LMArena German—1407
LMArena Japanese—1415
LMArena Korean—1380
LMArena Russian—1414
LMArena Spanish—1454

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1GLM-4.5
LMArena Instruction Following—1404

Long Context Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1GLM-4.5
Fiction.LiveBench—58.3%
LMArena Longer Query—1412

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1GLM-4.5
LMArena Text—1430
LMArena Creative Writing—1395
Short-Story Creative Writing—73.4%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1343
LMArena Multi-Turn—1415

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 2.1 better than GLM-4.5?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 2.1 or GLM-4.5 better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and GLM-4.5 share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5 has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper