# DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5

> DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 45.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-vs-glm-5
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 6 categories and GLM-5 in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 46.2 to 27.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 89.6% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 74.8% for GLM-5.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $3.20 for GLM-5.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 45.9 |
| Rank | 40 | 59 |
| Context | 1M | 205K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $1 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $3.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.8 (#29)
- GLM-5: 49.0 (#47)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | 1434 |
| LMArena Coding | 1511 | 1461 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | 765.62 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 72.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 72.8% |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 69.7% |
| SciCode | 51.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 48.2% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: —
- GLM-5: 30.9 (#65)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 52.4% |
| τ²-bench Airline | — | 82.5% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 9.8% |
| τ²-bench Retail | — | 73.7% |
| τ²-bench Telecom | — | 86.8% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,432 |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39)
- GLM-5: 27.6 (#100)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | 74.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1451 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.01 | 145.84 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| SimpleBench | — | 53.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 75% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 44.7% |
| CritPt | 14.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 10% |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LMCA | 47% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 46.3% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 61 |

## Math

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 48.4 (#52)
- GLM-5: 44.8 (#66)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1493 | 1440 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 65.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 80% |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 16.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97)
- GLM-5: 52.2 (#59)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1505 | 1454 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.1% |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29)
- GLM-5: 53.9 (#57)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1506 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1455 |
| LMArena Russian | 1473 | 1436 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1499 | 1452 |
| LMArena German | — | 1445 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1416 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1421 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24)
- GLM-5: 75.4 (#64)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1475 | 1427 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46)
- GLM-5: 44.6 (#58)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1476 | 1446 |
| CL-bench | — | 18.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43)
- GLM-5: 66.2 (#38)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1446 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1436 | 1438 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | 1601 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1460 | 1456 |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GLM-5?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 45.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GLM-5?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GLM-5 lists at $1 and $3.20.

### Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GLM-5 better for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 49.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GLM-5 share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5 has 45.