Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Solar Pro4

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index. Solar Pro4 costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.6

Rank #51 Confirmed

Solar Pro4 Upstage

41.5

Rank #123 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Solar Pro4 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 55.0 to 39.0.
  • Solar Pro4 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
  • Solar Pro4 accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 200K.
  • GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.1Solar Pro4
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Upstage
Noometry Index47.641.5
Released2026-04-072026-08-06
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window200K524K
Max output131K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$1.20
Results tracked4118

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 48.5 (#52), Solar Pro4: 39.9 (#135)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
LMArena WebDev15091371
LMArena Coding14861439
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
SciCode43.8%—
WeirdML57.1%—
ALE-Bench887.1—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106), Solar Pro4: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
APEX-Agents40.9%—
ExploitBench18.1%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 25,634—

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57), Solar Pro4: 27.3 (#107)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
LMArena Hard Prompts14721398
SimpleBench55.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)77.7%—
CritPt4.6%—
Chess Puzzles19%—
Thematic Generalization69.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index149.86—

Math GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48), Solar Pro4: 36.1 (#129)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
LMArena Math14721418
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)36.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.3%—
ProofBench22.2%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)33.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)12.5%—

Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45), Solar Pro4: 39.0 (#128)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
LMArena Expert14771421
GPQA Diamond89.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34%—

Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34), Solar Pro4: 49.0 (#134)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
LMArena Non-English14481362
LMArena Chinese15161417
LMArena French14781403
LMArena German14661351
LMArena Japanese14361300
LMArena Korean14231383
LMArena Russian14531360
LMArena Spanish14671408

Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41), Solar Pro4: 72.8 (#128)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
LMArena Instruction Following14511376

Long Context GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51), Solar Pro4: 42.0 (#125)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
LMArena Longer Query14671379

Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29), Solar Pro4: 56.7 (#133)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Solar Pro4
LMArena Text14621386
LMArena Creative Writing14541313
LMArena Multi-Turn14731391
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than Solar Pro4?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index. Solar Pro4 costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

Is GLM-5.1 or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 39.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Solar Pro4 does, with 524K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Solar Pro4 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper