# Claude Opus 4 vs GLM-4.5V

> Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5V costs 33× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-vs-glm-4-5v
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 6 categories and GLM-4.5V in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Opus 4 leads 61.2 to 52.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 74.3% for Claude Opus 4 and 59.8% for GLM-4.5V.
- GLM-4.5V is cheaper at $0.60 / $1.80 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
- Claude Opus 4 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 64K.
- GLM-4.5V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 39.8 |
| Rank | 100 | 158 |
| Context | 200K | 64K |
| Input $/M | $15 | $0.60 |
| Output $/M | $75 | $1.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4: 47.2 (#62)
- GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1347 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.7% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4: 34.8 (#42)
- GLM-4.5V: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 38% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1127 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4: 27.3 (#121)
- GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | 59.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1334 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| DTBench | 81.6% | — |
| LMCA | 37.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4: 42.0 (#86)
- GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1390 | 1354 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4: 44.0 (#88)
- GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1353 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4: 31.5 (#106)
- GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | 1154 |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
| VPCT | 38% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4: 48.8 (#138)
- GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1303 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1337 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1298 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1389 | 1336 |
| LMArena French | 1372 | — |
| LMArena German | 1391 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1331 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1321 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4: 77.1 (#28)
- GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1311 |
| IFEval | 91.8% | — |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4: 39.6 (#172)
- GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1304 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4: 61.2 (#89)
- GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1333 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1387 | 1295 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1332 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | — |
| WildBench | 85.2% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4 better than GLM-4.5V?

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5V costs 33× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 or GLM-4.5V?

GLM-4.5V is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $1.80 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4 lists at $15 and $75.

### Is Claude Opus 4 or GLM-4.5V better for coding?

Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.2 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4 does, with 200K tokens against 64K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and GLM-4.5V share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5V has 15.