Model comparison
GLM-5.1 vs GPT-5.4 Pro
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 47.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-5.1 costs 31× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 1 category and GPT-5.4 Pro in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.4 Pro leads 70.7 to 39.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 36.8% for GLM-5.1 and 82.5% for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GLM-5.1 is cheaper at $1.40 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GPT-5.4 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
- GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 47.8 | 58.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2026-03-05 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 131K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | $30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | $180 |
| Results tracked | 41 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55), GPT-5.4 Pro: 43.2 (#90)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 57.1% | 57.4% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1508 | — |
| SciCode | 43.8% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1485 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), GPT-5.4 Pro: 70.7 (#13)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | 74.1% |
| CritPt | 4.6% | 30% |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | 58.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.84 | 158.93 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 83.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 94.5% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 23.8% |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | — |
Math GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), GPT-5.4 Pro: 72.4 (#22)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | 82.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | 50% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | 37.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 58.5% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 22.2% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1473 | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), GPT-5.4 Pro: 68.3 (#7)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | 94.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | 46.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 44.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 8.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1476 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1515 | — |
| LMArena French | 1474 | — |
| LMArena German | 1465 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1454 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1469 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1466 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1472 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.1 better than GPT-5.4 Pro?
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 47.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-5.1 costs 31× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or GPT-5.4 Pro?
GLM-5.1 is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 Pro lists at $30 and $180.
Is GLM-5.1 or GPT-5.4 Pro better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 43.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and GPT-5.4 Pro share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.4 Pro has 16.