# Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs GLM-5.1

> GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-3-7-sonnet-vs-glm-5-1
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 24

## Summary

- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores higher in 2 categories and GLM-5.1 in 7 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.1 leads 38.2 to 18.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and 93.3% for GLM-5.1.
- GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 39.4 | 47.6 |
| Rank | 154 | 51 |
| Context | — | 200K |
| Input $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | — | $4.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 41.1 (#120)
- GLM-5.1: 48.5 (#52)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 61% | 74.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1361 | 1486 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 52.8% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 64.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
| SciCode | — | 43.8% |
| GSO | 3.8% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 57.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | 74.5% | — |
| CadEval | 54% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 887.1 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 33.9 (#46)
- GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 40.9% |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.9% | — |
| Cybench | 20% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 43.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 35.8% | — |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| METR Time Horizons | 60% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,634 |

## Reasoning

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 18.7 (#252)
- GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 46.4% | 55.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1333 | 1472 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.16 | 149.86 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.9% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 77.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 28.6% | — |
| CritPt | — | 4.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EnigmaEval | 4.2% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 69.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 87.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 74% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.8 | — |
| LiveBench | 76.1% | — |

## Math

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 35.7 (#137)
- GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1336 | 1472 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.1% | 33.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 67.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 22.2% |
| Omni-MATH | 33% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 79% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 12.5% |

## Knowledge

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 39.7 (#117)
- GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 79.7% | 89.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1321 | 1477 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34% |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.4% | — |
| Confabulations | 14.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 60.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 33.1 (#90)
- GLM-5.1: —

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1169 | — |
| GeoBench | 68% | — |
| VPCT | 39% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 33.9% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 44.3 (#174)
- GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1296 | 1448 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1299 | 1516 |
| LMArena French | 1302 | 1478 |
| LMArena German | 1301 | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1268 | 1436 |
| LMArena Korean | 1249 | 1423 |
| LMArena Russian | 1311 | 1453 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1299 | 1467 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 73.1 (#120)
- GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1451 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.3% | — |
| IFEval | 83.4% | — |

## Long Context

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 50.2 (#10)
- GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1467 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 54.6 (#145)
- GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1314 | 1462 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1332 | 1454 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1412 | 1592 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1473 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.1% | — |
| WildBench | 81.4% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 59.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than GLM-5.1?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet or GLM-5.1 better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 41.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and GLM-5.1 share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has 58 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.