# DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.1

> DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 47.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-vs-glm-5-1
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 22

## Summary

- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 5 categories and GLM-5.1 in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 55.0 to 41.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 54% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 22.2% for GLM-5.1.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 47.6 |
| Rank | 40 | 51 |
| Context | 1M | 200K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $4.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.8 (#29)
- GLM-5.1: 48.5 (#52)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | 1509 |
| SciCode | 51.9% | 43.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1511 | 1486 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | 887.1 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 74.2% |
| WeirdML | — | 57.1% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: —
- GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 40.9% |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,634 |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39)
- GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | 77.7% |
| CritPt | 14.3% | 4.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1472 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.01 | 149.86 |
| SimpleBench | — | 55.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 69.8% |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LMCA | 47% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 46.3% | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 48.4 (#52)
- GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 54% | 22.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1493 | 1472 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 67.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 33.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 12.5% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97)
- GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1505 | 1477 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 89.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34% |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29)
- GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1448 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1506 | 1516 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1478 |
| LMArena Russian | 1473 | 1453 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1499 | 1467 |
| LMArena German | — | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1436 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1423 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24)
- GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1475 | 1451 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46)
- GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1476 | 1467 |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43)
- GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1462 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1436 | 1454 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | 1592 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1460 | 1473 |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GLM-5.1?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 47.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GLM-5.1?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

### Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GLM-5.1 better for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 48.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GLM-5.1 share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.