Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs GPT-5.1-Codex

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

GPT-5.1-Codex OpenAI

38.6

Rank #186 Reported

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 1 category and GPT-5.1-Codex in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.6 leads 39.1 to 30.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Terminal-Bench: 24.5% for GLM-4.6 and 60.4% for GPT-5.1-Codex.
  • GLM-4.6 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5.1-Codex.
  • GPT-5.1-Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index41.438.6
Released2025-09-302025-11-12
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K400K
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$10
Results tracked296

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads

GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)55.4%66%
LMArena WebDev13401337
ALE-Bench340.821,245
SciCode38.4%—
LMArena Coding1449—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.1-Codex leads

GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
Terminal-Bench24.5%60.4%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.4%—
METR Time Horizons—70.8%

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
Kagi LLM Benchmark47.4%—
CritPt1.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1440—

Math GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
ProofBench—9%
LMArena Math1432—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)3.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.5%—
LMArena Expert1431—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Non-English1426—
LMArena Chinese1499—
LMArena French1459—
LMArena German1447—
LMArena Japanese1393—
LMArena Korean1400—
LMArena Russian1419—
LMArena Spanish1436—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Instruction Following1410—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Longer Query1422—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Text1440—
LMArena Creative Writing1411—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1411—
LMArena Multi-Turn1427—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6 better than GPT-5.1-Codex?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or GPT-5.1-Codex?

GLM-4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1-Codex lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is GLM-4.6 or GPT-5.1-Codex better for coding?

GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.1-Codex does, with 400K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and GPT-5.1-Codex share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.1-Codex has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper