Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM-4.6

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6 costs 6.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 Anthropic

44.1

Rank #81 Confirmed

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and GLM-4.6 in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads 48.4 to 40.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Terminal-Bench: 46.5% for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and 24.5% for GLM-4.6.
  • GLM-4.6 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
  • GLM-4.6 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 200K.
  • GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM-4.6 specifications
Claude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
ProviderAnthropicZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index44.141.4
Released2025-09-292025-09-30
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K205K
Max output64K131K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$15$2.20
Results tracked7329

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 47.3 (#61), GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)71.4%55.4%
LMArena WebDev13931340
SciCode44.7%38.4%
LMArena Coding14891449
ALE-Bench796.15340.82
SWE-bench Verified71.3%—
SWE-bench Multilingual67%—
GSO14.7%—
WeirdML47.7%—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 38.3 (#32), GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
Terminal-Bench46.5%24.5%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard73.2%72.4%
GDPval42.5%—
Remote Labor Index2.1%—
τ²-bench Airline72%—
τ²-bench Banking25.3%—
τ²-bench Retail72.4%—
τ²-bench Telecom84.9%—
Cybench60%—
DeepResearch Bench52.6%—
OSWorld62.9%—
LMArena Search1159—
METR Time Horizons67.4%—
Vending-Bench 23,839—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 26.9 (#125), GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%47.4%
CritPt1.1%1.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts14621440
ARC-AGI-213.6%—
SimpleBench54.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)37.3%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval6%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles17%—
DTBench83.2%—
LMCA38.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index146.84—
ForecastBench61.9—

Math GLM-4.6 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 32.3 (#216), GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
LMArena Math14491432
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)15.2%3.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%2.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)23.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%—
ProofBench19%—
Omni-MATH55.3%—
MATH Level 597.7%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 48.4 (#76), GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%9.5%
LMArena Expert14821431
GPQA Diamond82.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam13.7%—
SimpleQA Verified30.7%—
MMLU-Pro86.9%—
GPQA (HELM)68.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 34.8 (#89), GLM-4.6: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
VPCT39.8%—
LMArena Document1450—

Multilingual Too close to call

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 53.4 (#69), GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
LMArena Non-English14251426
LMArena Chinese14591499
LMArena French14581459
LMArena German14271447
LMArena Japanese13901393
LMArena Korean14031400
LMArena Russian14371419
LMArena Spanish14571436

Instruction Following Too close to call

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 75.0 (#78), GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
LMArena Instruction Following14591410
IFEval85%—

Long Context Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 45.2 (#46), GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
LMArena Longer Query14761422

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 66.5 (#34), GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5GLM-4.6
LMArena Text14391440
LMArena Creative Writing14421411
EQ-Bench Creative Writing16781411
LMArena Multi-Turn14651427
WildBench85.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than GLM-4.6?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6 costs 6.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM-4.6?

GLM-4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM-4.6 better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.3 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.6 does, with 205K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM-4.6 share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 73 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper