Claude Opus 4.8 vs GLM 5.3
Claude Opus 4.8 
GLM 5.3 Verdict
- Claude Opus 4.8 leads on quality: 63.3 vs 60.0.
- Claude Opus 4.8 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, instruction following, knowledge, long context, multimodal.
- GLM 5.3 (max) is stronger in human preference, reasoning, maths.
- GLM 5.3 (max) is 4.7× cheaper ($2.15 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 | GLM 5.3 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.3 | 60.0 |
| Agents & tools score | 63.7 | 52.8 |
| Coding score | 65.5 | 64.3 |
| Composite score | 75.1 | – |
| Human preference score | 65.7 | 68.9 |
| Instruction following score | 58.6 | – |
| Knowledge score | 65.5 | 55.8 |
| Long context score | 62.7 | – |
| Multimodal score | 64.5 | – |
| Reasoning score | 64.6 | 66.9 |
| Maths score | – | 60.0 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $2.15 |
| Output speed | 54 tok/s | 66 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 19.3 s | 33.5 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 90.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 68.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 29.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 91.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 41.0% |
| Terminal-Bench | – | 41.8% |
| SimpleBench | 64.8% | – |
| SciCode | – | 56.5% |
| Remote Labor Index | 8.3% | – |
| WeirdML | – | 75.4% |
| FrontierCode | 46.5% | – |
| ProofBench | – | 49.0% |
| GSO-Bench | 47.1% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.3 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1473 | 1486 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1504 | 1509 |
| LMArena Coding | 1529 | 1526 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1539 | 1614 |
| LMArena Vision | 1289 | – |
| LMArena Agent | – | 2.6 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 42.0 | – |
| IFBench | 62.2% | – |
| AA-LCR | 77.7% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | 28.8 | – |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 58.3% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 92.0% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 48.7% | – |
| SciCode (AA) | 54.4% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 94.4% | – |
| LiveCodeBench | 87.8% | 80.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | 89.6% | 86.8% |
| IOI | – | 68.4% |
| LegalBench | 83.6% | 84.8% |
| CorpFin | 66.7% | – |
| TaxEval | 75.6% | 72.4% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 71.9% | 71.5% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 88.6% | 95.4% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 92.4% | 88.1% |
| Vals Index | 60.9 | 57.0 |
| HiL-Bench | 35.3% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1281 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 4.8 vs GLM 5.3: questions
- Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GLM 5.3?
- Claude Opus 4.8 leads on quality: 63.3 vs 60.0. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 4.8 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-13, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GLM 5.3 for coding?
- Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in coding (66 vs 64 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GLM 5.3 for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in agentic tasks (64 vs 53 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or GLM 5.3?
- GLM 5.3 is cheaper: $2.15 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.8 or GLM 5.3?
- GLM 5.3 streams faster: 66 against 54 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.