GLM-5 vs GPT-5.4 Pro
Full profiles: GLM-5 (Zhipu AI) and GPT-5.4 Pro (OpenAI): every benchmark, price and rank.
Updated · Data from 8 sources
As of 29 Oct 2026, GLM-5 and GPT-5.4 Pro are neck and neck on quality (60.2 vs 63.1 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±5.2 margin), and GLM-5 is 44× cheaper at $1.55 vs $67.50 per 1M tokens blended. Choose GLM-5 for instruction following (71 vs 63), where it also streams 3×+ faster; choose GPT-5.4 Pro for fast first answers (6.7 s vs 46.8 s) and knowledge (74 vs 57) and reasoning (73 vs 68).
Key facts (as of 29 Oct 2026)
- GLM-5 scores 60.2 on the BenchLeader Index and GPT-5.4 Pro scores 63.1 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
- GLM-5 costs $1.55 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
- GPT-5.4 Pro costs $67.50 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
- GLM-5 streams 3×+ faster than GPT-5.4 Pro (Artificial Analysis, 7-day median, 29 Oct 2026).
GLM-5 benchmarks 
GPT-5.4 Pro benchmarks Which to pick for…
The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.
| Use case | Pick | Why | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | GPT-5.4 Pro | 73 vs 68 category score | Medium |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.4 Pro | 74 vs 57 category score | High |
| Following instructions | GLM-5 | 71 vs 63 category score | High |
| Lowest cost | GLM-5 | $1.55 vs $67.50 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.073 vs $2.52 | – |
| Fastest first answer | GPT-5.4 Pro | 6.7 s (GPT-5.4 Pro) vs 46.8 s (GLM-5 (thinking)) to the first answer token | – |
| High volume on a budget | Neither flagship | A smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs | – |
Key differences
- GLM-5 (thinking) and GPT-5.4 Pro are neck and neck on quality (60.2 vs 63.1, within the ±5.2 margin).
- GLM-5 (thinking) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, instruction following, long context, maths.
- GPT-5.4 Pro is stronger in knowledge, reasoning, multimodal.
- GLM-5 (thinking) is 44× cheaper ($1.55 vs $67.50 per 1M blended).
- GLM-5 (thinking) streams 9.8× faster (69 vs 7 tokens per second).
At a glance
| Spec | GLM-5 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Zhipu AI | OpenAI |
| Released | 11 Feb 2026 | 4 Mar 2026 |
| Context window (tokens) | 204,800 | 1,050,000 |
| Compared at | GLM-5 (thinking) | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| Price in / out / cached input per 1M | $1.00 / $3.20 / $0.149 | $30.00 / $180.00 / – |
Category by category
Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.
| Category | GLM-5 (thinking) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 68.2 | 72.6 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Coding | 59.1 | – | not comparable |
| Agents & tools | 58.0 | – | not comparable |
| Maths | 63.2 | – | not comparable |
| Knowledge | 57.3 | 73.6 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Instruction following | 70.8 | 62.8 | GLM-5 |
| Multimodal | – | 69.8 | not comparable |
| Long context | 62.6 | – | not comparable |
Where sources disagree
Across the 0 benchmarks both have, GLM-5 leads 0, GPT-5.4 Pro leads 0.
| Overall index | GLM-5 (thinking) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 60.2 | 63.1 | neck and neck |
Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).
Price, speed and latency
List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.
| Measure | GLM-5 (thinking) | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Blended price per 1M tokens | $1.55 | $67.50 |
| Input / output per 1M | $1.00 / $3.20 | $30.00 / $180.00 |
| Cached input per 1M | $0.149 | – |
| Price per task: chat reply | $0.0014 | $0.066 |
| Price per task: summarize a 30-page report | $0.014 | $0.468 |
| Price per task: code edit | $0.011 | $0.450 |
| Price per task: agentic coding session | $0.073 | $2.52 |
| Price per task: structured extraction | $0.0026 | $0.096 |
| Output speed | 69 tok/s | 7 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 46.8 s | 6.7 s |
| Time to a complete answer | 54.0 s | – |
Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. GLM-5 (thinking) scores 60.2 and takes 47 s to its first answer token; GLM-5 scores 54.9 in 2 s. GPT-5.4 Pro scores 63.1 and takes 7 s to its first answer token; GPT-5.4 Pro (xhigh) scores 59.9 in 7 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.
Every benchmark
67 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.
| Metric | Publisher | GLM-5 (thinking) | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | BenchLeader | 60.2 | 63.1 |
| Agents & tools score | BenchLeader | 58.0 | – |
| Coding score | BenchLeader | 59.1 | – |
| Instruction following score | BenchLeader | 70.8 | 62.8 |
| Knowledge score | BenchLeader | 57.3 | 73.6 |
| Long context score | BenchLeader | 62.6 | – |
| Maths score | BenchLeader | 63.2 | – |
| Reasoning score | BenchLeader | 68.2 | 72.6 |
| Multimodal score | BenchLeader | – | 69.8 |
| Blended price $/M | BenchLeader | $1.55 | $67.50 |
| Output speed | BenchLeader | 69 tok/s | 7 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | BenchLeader | 46.8 s | 6.7 s |
| Context window | BenchLeader | 204,800 tokens | 1,050,000 tokens |
| Reasoning | |||
| GPQA Diamond | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 87.8%† | 94.6%† |
| Humanity's Last Exam | Scale AI / CAIS | – | 44.3% |
| SimpleBench | SimpleBench | 53.2%† | 74.1% |
| Arena Hard Prompts | Arena (LMArena) | 1478† | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 82.0% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 29.3% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | Vals AI | 83.3% | – |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75.0% | – |
| ARC-AGI-1 | ARC Prize | 44.7%† | 94.5%† |
| ARC-AGI-2 | ARC Prize | 4.9%† | 83.3%† |
| CritPt | Artificial Analysis | 2.0% | 30.0%† |
| Chess Puzzles | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 59.0%† |
| CL-bench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 18.7%† | – |
| ForecastBench | ForecastBench | 63.7%† | – |
| Coding | |||
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 72.1%† | – |
| WeirdML | WeirdML | 48.2%† | 57.4%† |
| Arena Coding | Arena (LMArena) | 1498† | – |
| Arena WebDev | Arena (LMArena) | 1436† | – |
| LiveCodeBench | Vals AI | 81.9% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | Vals AI | 71.4% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | SWE-bench | 72.8%† | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | SWE-bench | 72.8%† | – |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | 23.4% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA | Scale AI SEAL | 20.5%† | – |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoring | Scale AI SEAL | 24.2%† | – |
Show all 67 benchmarks
| Metric | Publisher | GLM-5 (thinking) | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | |||
| SWE Atlas: Test Writing | Scale AI SEAL | 28.7%† | – |
| ALE-Bench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 765.6† | – |
| Agents & tools | |||
| Terminal-Bench | Terminal-Bench | 52.4%† | – |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | Artificial Analysis | 43.2% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 98.3% | – |
| τ²-bench | τ²-bench | 81.0% | – |
| τ³-bench Banking | τ²-bench | 9.8% | – |
| APEX-Agents (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 14.4% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals) | Vals AI | 49.4% | – |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Andon Labs | 4432.1† | – |
| Maths | |||
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 82.5%† |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 58.5%† |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 80.0%† | – |
| AIME (Vals) | Vals AI | 91.7% | – |
| AIME 2026 | MathArena | 96.7%† | – |
| HMMT February 2026 | MathArena | 86.4%† | – |
| USAMO 2026 | MathArena | 35.1%† | – |
| MathArena Apex | MathArena | 10.9%† | 69.8%† |
| Arena Maths | Arena (LMArena) | 1444† | – |
| Knowledge | |||
| SimpleQA Verified | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 46.3%† |
| MMLU-Pro | Vals AI | 86.0% | – |
| LegalBench | Vals AI | 84.1% | – |
| CorpFin | Vals AI | 62.9% | – |
| TaxEval | Vals AI | 70.0% | – |
| MedQA | Vals AI | 94.3% | – |
| MultiNRC | Scale AI SEAL | – | 62.3% |
| CaseLaw v2 | Vals AI | 52.5% | – |
| Instruction following | |||
| IFBench | Artificial Analysis | 72.3% | – |
| MultiChallenge | Scale AI SEAL | – | 69.2% |
| TutorBench | Scale AI SEAL | – | 56.6% |
| Arena Instruction Following | Arena (LMArena) | 1447† | – |
| Human preference | |||
| Arena Text | Arena (LMArena) | 1457† | – |
| Arena Creative Writing | Arena (LMArena) | 1448† | – |
| Arena Multi-turn | Arena (LMArena) | 1471† | – |
| Arena Longer Queries | Arena (LMArena) | 1468† | – |
| Multimodal | |||
| VISTA | Scale AI SEAL | – | 53.9% |
| Long context | |||
| AA-LCR v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | 75.7% | – |
| Composite | |||
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 145.8† | 159.6 |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | Artificial Analysis | 27.9 | – |
| AA Progress Index v1 | Artificial Analysis | 280.9 | – |
| Safety & honesty | |||
| FORTRESS | Scale AI SEAL | – | 14.8% |
| MASK | Scale AI SEAL | – | 91.7% |
Data as of 2026-10-29. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
What changed
- GLM-5 (thinking): cached input price moved from $0.20/M to $0.15/M (25% down).
- GLM-5 (thinking): BenchLeader Index 60.6 → 60.1.
- GLM-5 (thinking): 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1); cached input price moved from $0.15/M to $0.20/M (34% up).
- GPT-5.4 Pro: BenchLeader Index 63.6 → 63.1.
- GLM-5 (thinking): cached input price moved from $0.20/M to $0.15/M (25% down).
- GLM-5 (thinking): cached input price moved from $0.15/M to $0.20/M (34% up).
- GLM-5 (thinking): cached input price moved from $0.20/M to $0.15/M (25% down).
- GLM-5 (thinking): cached input price moved from $0.15/M to $0.20/M (34% up).
- GPT-5.4 Pro: 1 score revision.
- GLM-5 (thinking): cached input price moved from $0.20/M to $0.15/M (25% down).
Related comparisons
- GLM-5 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GLM-5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- GLM-5 vs GPT-6 Astra
- GPT-5.4 Pro vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-5.4 Pro vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-5.4 Pro vs GPT-6 Astra
- GPT-5.4 Pro vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- GLM-5 vs GPT-5.3-Codex
Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs
GLM-5 vs GPT-5.4 Pro: questions
- Is GLM-5 better than GPT-5.4 Pro?
- GLM-5 (thinking) and GPT-5.4 Pro are neck and neck on quality (60.2 vs 63.1, within the ±5.2 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 29 Oct 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
- GLM-5 vs GPT-5.4 Pro: which is cheaper, and will that change?
- GLM-5 is cheaper today: $1.55 against $67.50 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
- Which is faster, GLM-5 or GPT-5.4 Pro?
- GLM-5 streams 3×+ faster (69 vs 7 output tokens per second, Artificial Analysis 7-day median).
- Which is better for long documents?
- GPT-5.4 Pro accepts more context: 1,050,000 against 204,800 tokens for GLM-5.
- Which has lower latency?
- GPT-5.4 Pro answers first: 6.7 s against 46.8 s to the first answer token, as Artificial Analysis measures it. Reasoning effort drives most of this: a higher setting thinks longer before it answers.
More questions (1)
- When was GPT-5.4 Pro released?
- GPT-5.4 Pro was released on 4 Mar 2026.