Noometry

Model comparison

Claude 3 Opus vs GLM-4.6

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Claude 3 Opus Anthropic

29.5

Rank #310 Confirmed

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3 Opus scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.6 in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.6 leads 39.1 to 14.8.
  • GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
ProviderAnthropicZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index29.541.4
Released2024-02-292025-09-30
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—205K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.60
Output $ / M tokens—$2.20
Results tracked4629

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 32.9 (#267), GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Coding12641449
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—55.4%
LMArena WebDev—1340
SciCode—38.4%
WeirdML19.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct45.5%—
LiveBench Coding38.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete57.4%—
ALE-Bench—340.82
HumanEval+77.4%—
MBPP+73.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 24.6 (#116), GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
Terminal-Bench—24.5%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—72.4%
Cybench10%—
METR Time Horizons29.5%—

Reasoning GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 14.6 (#324), GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Hard Prompts12451440
SimpleBench23.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—47.4%
CritPt—1.1%
Chess Puzzles5%—
EnigmaEval0.8%—
LiveBench Reasoning40.6%—
DTBench61.6%—
LiveBench Data Analysis57.9%—
LMCA17%—
Epoch Capabilities Index126.91—
ForecastBench58.4—
LiveBench49.2%—
WinoGrande88.5%—

Math GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 14.8 (#299), GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Math12731432
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20254.7%—
LiveBench Math43.6%—
MATH Level 537.5%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—3.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—2.1%

Knowledge GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 24.5 (#267), GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Expert12231431
GPQA Diamond47.2%—
SimpleQA Verified12.6%—
Confabulations22.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.5%
MMLU84.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude 3 Opus: 27.1 (#116), GLM-4.6: —

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Vision1023—

Multilingual GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 41.4 (#207), GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Non-English12581426
LMArena Chinese12481499
LMArena French12751459
LMArena German12581447
LMArena Japanese12041393
LMArena Korean11871400
LMArena Russian12801419
LMArena Spanish12461436

Instruction Following GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 64.1 (#228), GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Instruction Following12481410
LiveBench Instruction Following63.9%—

Long Context GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 38.2 (#202), GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Longer Query12591422

Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads

Claude 3 Opus: 47.2 (#213), GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90)

BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusGLM-4.6
LMArena Text12621440
LMArena Creative Writing12351411
LMArena Multi-Turn12751427
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1411
LiveBench Language50.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 3 Opus better than GLM-4.6?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 3 Opus or GLM-4.6 better for coding?

GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 32.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 3 Opus and GLM-4.6 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3 Opus has 46 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper