Model comparison
GLM-4.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5 costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-6.1 Sol in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 93.7 to 39.0.
- GLM-4.5 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for GPT-6.1 Sol.
- GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- GLM-4.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 42.0 | 65.6 |
| Released | 2025-07-27 | 2026-09-29 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 98K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | $10 |
| Results tracked | 27 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125), GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.2 (#8)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1434 | 1487 |
| DeepSWE | — | 75.2% |
| FrontierCode | — | 50.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 54.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1755 |
| SciCode | — | 55.8% |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 344.82 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.52 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.5: —, GPT-6.1 Sol: 39.6 (#26)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 60% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 32% |
Reasoning GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100), GPT-6.1 Sol: 81.9 (#2)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1429 | 1466 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 94.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 95.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 98.5% |
| CritPt | — | 31.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 61% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 54.3% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 80% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 166.09 |
Math GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), GPT-6.1 Sol: 93.7 (#1)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1427 | 1464 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 93.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 100% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 100% |
| ProofBench | — | 99% |
Knowledge GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), GPT-6.1 Sol: 71.8 (#4)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1433 | 1502 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 95.4% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 73.9% |
| Confabulations | 11.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.5: —, GPT-6.1 Sol: 52.7 (#5)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1288 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 80% |
Multilingual GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), GPT-6.1 Sol: 54.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1438 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1477 |
| LMArena Russian | 1414 | 1455 |
| LMArena French | 1418 | — |
| LMArena German | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1454 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), GPT-6.1 Sol: 77.0 (#29)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 1468 |
Long Context GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), GPT-6.1 Sol: 44.9 (#54)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1412 | 1465 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 58.3% | — |
Writing & Preference GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.6 (#63)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1430 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1395 | 1432 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1415 | 1449 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.4% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1343 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5 better than GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5 costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5 or GPT-6.1 Sol?
GLM-4.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol lists at $2 and $10.
Is GLM-4.5 or GPT-6.1 Sol better for coding?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 63.2 versus 41.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6.1 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and GPT-6.1 Sol has 34.