Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs GPT-5-Codex

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.8

Rank #59 Confirmed

GPT-5-Codex OpenAI

37.9

Rank #192 Reported

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 2 categories and GPT-5-Codex in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.1 leads 39.1 to 30.9.
  • GLM-5.1 is cheaper at $1.40 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5-Codex.
  • GPT-5-Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 200K.
  • GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.1 and GPT-5-Codex specifications
GLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index47.837.9
Released2026-04-072025-09-15
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window200K400K
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$10
Results tracked413

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-Codex: 42.4 (#103)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
WeirdML57.1%54.5%
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
LMArena WebDev1508—
SciCode43.8%—
LMArena Coding1485—
ALE-Bench887.1—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5-Codex leads

GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), GPT-5-Codex: 31.0 (#72)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
Terminal-Bench—44.3%
APEX-Agents40.9%—
ExploitBench18.1%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 25,634—

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), GPT-5-Codex: 30.9 (#83)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
SimpleBench55.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—70.3%
NYT Connections (extended)77.7%—
CritPt4.6%—
Chess Puzzles19%—
Thematic Generalization69.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1472—
Epoch Capabilities Index149.84—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), GPT-5-Codex: —

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), GPT-5-Codex: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
GPQA Diamond89.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34%—
LMArena Expert1476—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), GPT-5-Codex: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
LMArena Non-English1447—
LMArena Chinese1515—
LMArena French1474—
LMArena German1465—
LMArena Japanese1434—
LMArena Korean1418—
LMArena Russian1454—
LMArena Spanish1469—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), GPT-5-Codex: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
LMArena Instruction Following1451—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), GPT-5-Codex: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
LMArena Longer Query1466—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), GPT-5-Codex: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1GPT-5-Codex
LMArena Text1461—
LMArena Creative Writing1453—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—
LMArena Multi-Turn1472—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than GPT-5-Codex?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or GPT-5-Codex?

GLM-5.1 is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5-Codex lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is GLM-5.1 or GPT-5-Codex better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5-Codex does, with 400K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and GPT-5-Codex share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5-Codex has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper