# GLM-5 vs GPT-5.4 nano

> GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.9 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 nano costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-5-vs-gpt-5-4-nano
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 30

## Summary

- They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5 scores higher in 8 categories and GPT-5.4 nano in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5 leads 52.2 to 41.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 75% for GLM-5 and 39.7% for GPT-5.4 nano.
- GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.25 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $3.20 for GLM-5.
- GPT-5.4 nano accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 205K.
- GLM-5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 45.9 | 41.9 |
| Rank | 59 | 111 |
| Context | 205K | 400K |
| Input $/M | $1 | $0.20 |
| Output $/M | $3.20 | $1.25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-5: 49.0 (#47)
- GPT-5.4 nano: 43.1 (#82)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 48.2% | 49.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1461 | 1404 |
| ALE-Bench | 765.62 | 1,005 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 72.1% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 72.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1434 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 69.7% | — |
| SciCode | — | 46.9% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-5: 30.9 (#65)
- GPT-5.4 nano: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| 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

- GLM-5: 27.6 (#100)
- GPT-5.4 nano: 23.8 (#159)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | 5.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75% | 39.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 44.7% | 51.5% |
| Chess Puzzles | 10% | 30% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1451 | 1380 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.84 | 145.78 |
| ForecastBench | 61 | 57.3 |
| SimpleBench | 53.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 74.8% | — |
| CritPt | — | 9.3% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| DTBench | — | 80.3% |
| LMCA | — | 36.9% |

## Math

- GLM-5: 44.8 (#66)
- GPT-5.4 nano: 40.7 (#76)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 80% | 87.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1440 | 1406 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 16.4% | 25.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | 6.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 44.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 12.2% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 65.7% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 5% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-5: 52.2 (#59)
- GPT-5.4 nano: 41.8 (#94)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 87.8% | 78.5% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.1% | 3.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1454 | 1397 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 11.7% |

## Multimodal

- GLM-5: —
- GPT-5.4 nano: 36.0 (#73)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1196 |

## Multilingual

- GLM-5: 53.9 (#57)
- GPT-5.4 nano: 48.8 (#136)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1430 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1511 | 1391 |
| LMArena French | 1455 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1445 | 1368 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1416 | 1342 |
| LMArena Korean | 1421 | 1321 |
| LMArena Russian | 1436 | 1363 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1452 | 1368 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-5: 75.4 (#64)
- GPT-5.4 nano: 72.1 (#139)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1427 | 1362 |

## Long Context

- GLM-5: 44.6 (#58)
- GPT-5.4 nano: 41.6 (#131)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1446 | 1365 |
| CL-bench | 18.7% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-5: 66.2 (#38)
- GPT-5.4 nano: 55.9 (#137)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1446 | 1372 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1438 | 1313 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1382 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1601 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-5 better than GPT-5.4 nano?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.9 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 nano costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-5 or GPT-5.4 nano?

GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; GLM-5 lists at $1 and $3.20.

### Is GLM-5 or GPT-5.4 nano better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 43.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.4 nano does, with 400K tokens against 205K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-5 and GPT-5.4 nano share?

30 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5 has 45 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.4 nano has 40.