# Claude 2.1 vs GLM-5.1

> GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-2-1-vs-glm-5-1
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 4

## Summary

- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.1 in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 55.0 to 15.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.9% for Claude 2.1 and 93.3% for GLM-5.1.
- GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 47.6 |
| Rank | 340 | 51 |
| Context | — | 200K |
| Input $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | — | $4.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude 2.1: 25.8 (#322)
- GLM-5.1: 48.5 (#52)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 7.1% | 57.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 74.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
| SciCode | — | 43.8% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1486 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 887.1 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 40.9% |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,634 |

## Reasoning

- Claude 2.1: 20.6 (#216)
- GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.22 | 149.86 |
| SimpleBench | — | 55.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 77.7% |
| CritPt | — | 4.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 69.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1472 |
| DTBench | 51% | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |

## Math

- Claude 2.1: 9.6 (#309)
- GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | 93.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 67.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 22.2% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1472 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 33.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 12.5% |

## Knowledge

- Claude 2.1: 15.5 (#287)
- GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | 89.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1477 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1448 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1516 |
| LMArena French | — | 1478 |
| LMArena German | — | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1436 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1423 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1453 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1467 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1451 |

## Long Context

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1467 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1462 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1454 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1592 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1473 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 2.1 better than GLM-5.1?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 2.1 or GLM-5.1 better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 25.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and GLM-5.1 share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.