# Claude Opus 4.1 vs GLM-4.6

> Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM-4.6 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (40.8 vs 40.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-1-vs-glm-4-6
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 23

## Summary

- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and GLM-4.6 in 2 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.6 leads 36.4 to 22.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Terminal-Bench: 38% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 24.5% for GLM-4.6.
- GLM-4.6 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- GLM-4.6 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 200K.
- GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 40.9 |
| Rank | 136 | 132 |
| Context | 200K | 205K |
| Input $/M | $15 | $0.60 |
| Output $/M | $75 | $2.20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69)
- GLM-4.6: 39.9 (#137)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | 1339 |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1449 |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | 340.82 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 55.4% |
| SciCode | — | 38.4% |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38)
- GLM-4.6: 32.1 (#60)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | 24.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 72.4% |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70)
- GLM-4.6: 23.1 (#168)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1440 |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 47.4% |
| CritPt | — | 1.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LMCA | 37.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267)
- GLM-4.6: 36.4 (#115)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1431 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | 3.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | 2.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93)
- GLM-4.6: 39.6 (#118)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | 9.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1432 |
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114)
- GLM-4.6: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90)
- GLM-4.6: 53.6 (#62)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1500 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1459 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1394 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1401 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1418 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1436 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53)
- GLM-4.6: 74.5 (#93)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1410 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60)
- GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#91)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1423 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70)
- GLM-4.6: 61.3 (#86)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1440 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1427 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1411 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than GLM-4.6?

Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM-4.6 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (40.8 vs 40.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or GLM-4.6?

GLM-4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 or GLM-4.6 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 39.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.6 does, with 205K tokens against 200K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and GLM-4.6 share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.