# DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM-4.6

> DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v4-pro-vs-glm-4-6
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 24

## Summary

- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in 9 categories and GLM-4.6 in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Pro leads 56.5 to 23.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 18% for DeepSeek V4 Pro and 1.1% for GLM-4.6.
- Both cost about the same: $0.66 input and $1.98 output per million tokens.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 54.3 | 41.4 |
| Rank | 31 | 135 |
| Context | 1M | 205K |
| Input $/M | $0.66 | $0.60 |
| Output $/M | $1.98 | $2.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 52.4 (#34)
- GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1582 | 1340 |
| SciCode | 51% | 38.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1470 | 1449 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,403 | 340.82 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 77.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 28.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 55.4% |
| WeirdML | 66.2% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 32.8 (#58)
- GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 24.5% |
| APEX-Agents | 47.3% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 72.4% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,285 | — |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 56.5 (#24)
- GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.5% | 47.4% |
| CritPt | 18% | 1.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | 1440 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| DTBench | 93.9% | — |
| LMCA | 45.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 40% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.31 | — |
| ForecastBench | 56.1 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 64.8 (#30)
- GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1455 | 1432 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 64.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 76.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 50% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 3.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 59.5 (#31)
- GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.6% | 9.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1464 | 1431 |
| GPQA Diamond | 91.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 52.9% | — |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 54.4 (#45)
- GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1486 | 1499 |
| LMArena French | 1472 | 1459 |
| LMArena German | 1458 | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1445 | 1393 |
| LMArena Korean | 1447 | 1400 |
| LMArena Russian | 1453 | 1419 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | 1436 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 76.1 (#47)
- GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1448 | 1410 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 45.0 (#51)
- GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1458 | 1422 |
| CL-bench Life | 13.5% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek V4 Pro: 65.5 (#46)
- GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1440 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1446 | 1411 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1553 | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | 1427 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1166 | — |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than GLM-4.6?

DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro or GLM-4.6?

DeepSeek V4 Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.66 per million input tokens and $1.98 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

### Is DeepSeek V4 Pro or GLM-4.6 better for coding?

DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.4 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Pro and GLM-4.6 share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Pro has 48 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.