Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs GLM-4.5-Air

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5-Air costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

GLM-4.5-Air Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.9

Rank #177 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and GLM-4.5-Air in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 54.8 to 33.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 80.2% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 43% for GLM-4.5-Air.
  • GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.10 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Claude Opus 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • GLM-4.5-Air has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5 and GLM-4.5-Air specifications
Claude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
ProviderAnthropicZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index50.538.9
Released2025-11-012025-07-20
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output64K98K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.20
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.10
Results tracked6927

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), GLM-4.5-Air: 33.3 (#259)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
GSO26.5%2.9%
LMArena Coding15041397
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
LMArena WebDev1494—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
WeirdML63.7%—
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), GLM-4.5-Air: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), GLM-4.5-Air: 24.1 (#166)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%43%
LMArena Hard Prompts14761379
ForecastBench60.759.2
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
SimpleBench62%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09—

Math Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), GLM-4.5-Air: 36.2 (#170)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Math14631396
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%—
ProofBench36%—
Omni-MATH—39.1%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), GLM-4.5-Air: 35.0 (#191)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%8.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%9.3%
LMArena Expert14871370
GPQA Diamond86%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
MMLU-Pro—76.2%
GPQA (HELM)—59.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), GLM-4.5-Air: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), GLM-4.5-Air: 49.1 (#135)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Non-English14381366
LMArena Chinese14701426
LMArena French14711399
LMArena German14491377
LMArena Japanese14161348
LMArena Korean14241308
LMArena Russian14471373
LMArena Spanish14581386

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), GLM-4.5-Air: 69.6 (#171)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Instruction Following14781354
IFEval—81.2%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), GLM-4.5-Air: 41.6 (#135)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Longer Query14801366
CL-bench21.1%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), GLM-4.5-Air: 55.9 (#139)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Text14511384
LMArena Creative Writing14451343
LMArena Multi-Turn14661371
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—
WildBench—78.9%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than GLM-4.5-Air?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5-Air costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or GLM-4.5-Air?

GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or GLM-4.5-Air better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 33.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and GLM-4.5-Air share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5-Air has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper