Model comparison
GLM-5.1 vs o3-pro
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 3 categories and o3-pro in 2 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where o3-pro leads 72.2 to 44.9.
- GLM-5.1 is cheaper at $1.40 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $20 / $80 for o3-pro.
- GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-5.1 | o3-pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 47.8 | 42.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2025-06-10 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 200K |
| Max output | 131K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | $20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | $80 |
| Results tracked | 41 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o3-pro leads
GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55), o3-pro: 55.5 (#24)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 57.1% | 58.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 84.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1508 | — |
| SciCode | 43.8% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1485 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | — |
Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), o3-pro: 23.8 (#171)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.84 | 147.42 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 72.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 59.3% |
| CritPt | 4.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | — |
| DTBench | — | 86.9% |
| LMCA | — | 38.5% |
Math Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 22.2% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1473 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), o3-pro: 29.5 (#238)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 14.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 23.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1476 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-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), o3-pro: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | — |
Long Context o3-pro leads
GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), o3-pro: 72.2 (#1)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 97.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1466 | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), o3-pro: 57.1 (#133)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 84.4% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1472 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.1 better than o3-pro?
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or o3-pro?
GLM-5.1 is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; o3-pro lists at $20 and $80.
Is GLM-5.1 or o3-pro better for coding?
o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 48.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 200K tokens.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and o3-pro share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and o3-pro has 12.