Claude Opus 5 vs GLM 5.1
Claude Opus 5 
GLM 5.1 Verdict
- Claude Opus 5 leads on quality: 70.0 vs 60.2.
- Claude Opus 5 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- GLM 5.1 is stronger in instruction following.
- GLM 5.1 is 4.7× cheaper ($2.15 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 | GLM 5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 70.0 | 60.2 |
| Agents & tools score | 71.5 | 56.8 |
| Coding score | 74.5 | 57.3 |
| Composite score | 93.1 | 62.4 |
| Human preference score | 78.2 | 66.6 |
| Knowledge score | 70.6 | 56.6 |
| Long context score | 66.2 | 63.3 |
| Maths score | 67.1 | 53.0 |
| Multimodal score | 69.4 | – |
| Reasoning score | 71.5 | 61.4 |
| Instruction following score | – | 73.9 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $2.15 |
| Output speed | 51 tok/s | 65 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 93.0 s | 60.1 s |
| Context window | 1M | 200k |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.9% | 89.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 36.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 97.8% | 93.3% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 74.2% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 34.0% |
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | 55.1% |
| SciCode | – | 43.8% |
| WeirdML | 86.3% | 57.1% |
| ProofBench | – | 22.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.6 | 149.7 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1466 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1489 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1514 |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1508 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 50.7 | 26.4 |
| IFBench | – | 76.3% |
| AA-LCR | 79.3% | 73.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | 84.7% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | 37.1 | 0.8 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 43.2% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 93.2% | 86.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 54.9% | 30.1% |
| SciCode (AA) | 56.4% | 44.8% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 97.7% |
| AIME (Vals) | – | 91.9% |
| LiveCodeBench | 89.0% | 81.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | 91.6% | 86.9% |
| IOI | 91.7% | – |
| LegalBench | 87.0% | 84.4% |
| CorpFin | 73.2% | 64.5% |
| TaxEval | 75.1% | 71.2% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 84.6% | 56.9% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 97.0% | 76.4% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 93.4% | 84.5% |
| Vals Index | 67.2 | – |
| AIME 2026 | – | 95.8% |
| HMMT February 2026 | – | 89.4% |
| MathArena Apex | – | 11.5% |
| MCP Atlas | – | 75.6% |
| HiL-Bench | 57.0% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 5 vs GLM 5.1: questions
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than GLM 5.1?
- Claude Opus 5 leads on quality: 70.0 vs 60.2. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 5 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than GLM 5.1 for coding?
- Claude Opus 5 scores higher in coding (75 vs 57 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than GLM 5.1 for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 5 scores higher in agentic tasks (72 vs 57 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or GLM 5.1?
- GLM 5.1 is cheaper: $2.15 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 5 or GLM 5.1?
- GLM 5.1 streams faster: 65 against 51 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Opus 5 accepts more context: 1M against 200k tokens.