GLM 5.2 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
GLM 5.2 
GPT-6.1 Sol Verdict
- GPT-6.1 Sol (max) leads on quality: 69.3 vs 62.6.
- GLM 5.2 (max) is stronger in instruction following.
- GPT-6.1 Sol (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, long context, maths, reasoning, multimodal.
- GLM 5.2 (max) is 1.9× cheaper ($2.15 vs $4.00 per 1M blended).
- GLM 5.2 (max) streams 1.5× faster (82 vs 56 tokens per second).
| Metric | GLM 5.2 (max) | GPT-6.1 Sol (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 62.6 | 69.3 |
| Agents & tools score | 62.9 | 63.9 |
| Coding score | 62.4 | 72.4 |
| Composite score | 67.7 | 79.0 |
| Human preference score | 67.0 | 68.1 |
| Instruction following score | 71.6 | – |
| Knowledge score | 54.0 | 78.8 |
| Long context score | 64.3 | 66.8 |
| Maths score | 57.7 | 72.5 |
| Reasoning score | 70.2 | 76.4 |
| Multimodal score | – | 66.2 |
| Blended price $/M | $2.15 | $4.00 |
| Output speed | 82 tok/s | 56 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 28.4 s | 326.9 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1.1M |
| GPQA Diamond | 91.9% | 95.4% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | 59.2% | 93.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | 100.0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 86.4% | 100.0% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | 78.7% | – |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.2% | 73.9% |
| Terminal-Bench | – | 58.2% |
| SciCode | 50.5% | 54.2% |
| WeirdML | 70.1% | – |
| APEX-Agents | – | 60.0% |
| ProofBench | 35.0% | – |
| LMArena Text | 1475 | 1484 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1495 | 1507 |
| LMArena Coding | 1512 | 1545 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1603 | 1755 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1288 |
| LMArena Agent | 3.2 | 11.7 |
| LiveBench | – | 81.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 92.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 80.4% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 54.5% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 96.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 82.7% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 90.1% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 74.2% |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 33.7 | 51.8 |
| IFBench | 73.3% | – |
| AA-LCR | 78.3% | 83.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 86.0% |
| AA-Omniscience | 4.4 | 41.5 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 50.8% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 89.5% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 41.1% | 52.9% |
| SciCode (AA) | 51.2% | 54.2% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 99.1% | – |
| IOI | – | 96.9% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 67.8% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 82.8% | – |
| Vals Index | – | 61.1 |
| ARC-AGI-1 | – | 96.5% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | – | 94.2% |
| ARC-AGI-3 | – | 96.2% |
| CritPt | 20.9% | 31.7% |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | 43.7% | 53.8% |
| τ³-Banking (AA) | 34.6% | – |
| ITBench SRE (AA) | 42.7% | – |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | – | 50.0% |
| APEX-Agents (AA) | 33.7% | – |
| BioMysteryBench | – | 79.6% |
| Code Migration | 37.9% | 65.1% |
| CyberBench | – | 39.3% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | – | 70.8% |
| Finance Agent v2 | – | 52.0% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark | – | 5.4% |
| Legal Research Bench | 31.3% | 38.5% |
| MedCode | – | 48.8% |
| MedScribe | – | 86.5% |
| MysteryMechanism | – | 46.4% |
| ProgramBench | 0.5% | – |
| Public Benefits Bench | – | 59.3% |
| SAGE | – | 46.5% |
| SkillsBench | 45.1% | – |
| SREBench | 0.0% | 50.8% |
| Tax Agent Bench | – | 62.3% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | – | 55.0% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | 64.0% | 88.9% |
| LMArena Maths | 1486 | 1488 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1462 |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1469 | 1488 |
| LMArena Multi-turn | 1475 | 1487 |
| LMArena Longer Queries | 1486 | 1496 |
| Chess Puzzles | 21.0% | 61.0% |
| EBR-bench | 9.5% | 54.3% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | – | 80.0% |
| PostTrainBench | 31.7% | – |
| DeepSWE v1.1 | 43.8% | – |
| LMCA | 45.8% | – |
| DTBench | 93.6% | – |
| ALE-Bench | 1010.2 | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 1.0% | 56.1% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA) | 77.9% | – |
| AutomationBench | – | 64.9% |
| GDP.pdf | – | 31.0% |
| MLCR | – | 33.9% |
| Harvey LAB | – | 6.9% |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 24.3% | 62.1% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 73.7% | 45.7% |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | – | 1557 |
Data as of 2026-10-11. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
GLM 5.2 vs GPT-6.1 Sol: questions
- Is GLM 5.2 better than GPT-6.1 Sol?
- GPT-6.1 Sol (max) leads on quality: 69.3 vs 62.6. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GPT-6.1 Sol (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-10-11, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is GLM 5.2 better than GPT-6.1 Sol for coding?
- GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher in coding (72 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is GLM 5.2 better than GPT-6.1 Sol for agentic tasks?
- GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher in agentic tasks (64 vs 63 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, GLM 5.2 or GPT-6.1 Sol?
- GLM 5.2 is cheaper: $2.15 against $4.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, GLM 5.2 or GPT-6.1 Sol?
- GLM 5.2 streams faster: 82 against 56 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.1M against 1M tokens.