BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelCoding plansLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases8

GLM-5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol

Full profiles: GLM-5 (Zhipu AI) and GPT-5.6 Sol (OpenAI): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 11 sources

As of 29 Oct 2026, GPT-5.6 Sol is ahead of GLM-5 on quality (65.4 vs 60.2 on the BenchLeader Index), but GLM-5 is 5.2× cheaper at $1.55 vs $8.00 per 1M tokens blended. Choose GLM-5 for reasoning (68 vs 65) and fast first answers (46.8 s vs 86.2 s); choose GPT-5.6 Sol for agents & tools (67 vs 58), maths (71 vs 63), and coding (66 vs 59).

Key facts (as of 29 Oct 2026)

  • GLM-5 scores 60.2 on the BenchLeader Index and GPT-5.6 Sol scores 65.4 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
  • GLM-5 costs $1.55 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
  • GPT-5.6 Sol costs $8.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
  • Of the 16 benchmarks both models have, GPT-5.6 Sol leads 15 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
GLM-5 benchmarks thinking Zhipu AI GPT-5.6 Sol benchmarks max OpenAIOpen in the comparison tool

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 casePickWhyConfidence
CodingGPT-5.6 Sol66 vs 59 category score; LiveCodeBench 82.6% vs 81.9%Medium
Agents & tool useGPT-5.6 Sol67 vs 58 category score; Terminal-Bench Hard 65.9% vs 43.2%High
MathsGPT-5.6 Sol71 vs 63 category scoreHigh
ReasoningGLM-568 vs 65 category score; GPQA Diamond (AA) 82.0% vs 94.1%Medium
KnowledgeGPT-5.6 Sol64 vs 57 category score; MMLU-Pro 89.1% vs 86.0%Medium
Long documentsGPT-5.6 Sol67 vs 63 category score; AA-LCR v1.1 84.0% vs 75.7%Medium
Following instructionsEither71 vs 71 category score; IFBench 72.3% vs 72.7%Either
Lowest costGLM-5$1.55 vs $8.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.073 vs $0.320–
Fastest first answerGLM-546.8 s (GLM-5 (thinking)) vs 86.2 s (GPT-5.6 Sol (max)) to the first answer token–
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max) leads on quality: 65.4 vs 60.2.
  • GLM-5 (thinking) is stronger in reasoning.
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, instruction following, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal.
  • GLM-5 (thinking) is 5.2× cheaper ($1.55 vs $8.00 per 1M blended).

At a glance

SpecGLM-5GPT-5.6 Sol
DeveloperZhipu AIOpenAI
Released11 Feb 20269 Jul 2026
Context window (tokens)204,8001,050,000
Compared atGLM-5 (thinking)GPT-5.6 Sol (max)
Open weightsYesNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$1.00 / $3.20 / $0.149$4.00 / $20.00 / $0.400

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.

CategoryGLM-5 (thinking)GPT-5.6 Sol (max)Leader
Reasoning68.265.1GLM-5
Coding59.165.8GPT-5.6 Sol
Agents & tools58.066.6GPT-5.6 Sol
Maths63.270.8GPT-5.6 Sol
Knowledge57.363.9GPT-5.6 Sol
Instruction following70.871.1level
Multimodal–66.2not comparable
Long context62.666.9GPT-5.6 Sol

Where sources disagree

Across the 16 benchmarks both have, GLM-5 leads 1, GPT-5.6 Sol leads 15. Every overall index that rates both puts GPT-5.6 Sol ahead.

Overall indexGLM-5 (thinking)GPT-5.6 Sol (max)Leader
BenchLeader Index60.265.4GPT-5.6 Sol
Arena Text1457†1485GPT-5.6 Sol

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.

MeasureGLM-5 (thinking)GPT-5.6 Sol (max)
Blended price per 1M tokens$1.55$8.00
Input / output per 1M$1.00 / $3.20$4.00 / $20.00
Cached input per 1M$0.149$0.400
Price per task: chat reply$0.0014$0.0076
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.014$0.060
Price per task: code edit$0.011$0.054
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.073$0.320
Price per task: structured extraction$0.0026$0.012
Output speed69 tok/s85 tok/s
Time to first answer46.8 s86.2 s
Time to a complete answer54.0 s92.1 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-5.6 Sol (max) scores 65.4 and takes 86 s to its first answer token; GPT-5.6 Sol (xhigh) scores 64.4 in 22 s, GPT-5.6 Sol (high) scores 63.6 in 11 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

143 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.

MetricPublisherGLM-5 (thinking)GPT-5.6 Sol (max)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader60.265.4
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader58.066.6
Coding scoreBenchLeader59.165.8
Instruction following scoreBenchLeader70.871.1
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader57.363.9
Long context scoreBenchLeader62.666.9
Maths scoreBenchLeader63.270.8
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader68.265.1
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader–66.2
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$1.55$8.00
Output speedBenchLeader69 tok/s85 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader46.8 s86.2 s
Context windowBenchLeader204,800 tokens1,050,000 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub87.8%†93.5%
SimpleBenchSimpleBench53.2%†64.8%†
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)1478†1512†
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench–91.7%
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis82.0%94.1%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis29.3%49.5%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI83.3%95.2%
EnigmaEvalScale AI SEAL–37.1%†
Kagi LLM BenchmarkKagi LLM Benchmark75.0%67.0%†
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize44.7%†96.5%
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize4.9%†92.5%
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize–7.8%
CritPtArtificial Analysis2.0%32.3%
CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)Artificial Analysis–56.0%
MysteryMechanismVals AI–33.3%
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–59.0%
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–58.0%
CL-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub18.7%†–
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–58.4%
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–95.5%
ForecastBenchForecastBench63.7%†65.5%
BTF-3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–13.7%
Coding
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub72.1%†–
SciCodeSciCode–57.1%
WeirdMLWeirdML48.2%†87.0%
Show all 143 benchmarks
MetricPublisherGLM-5 (thinking)GPT-5.6 Sol (max)
Coding
FrontierCodeCognition–47.5%†
GSO-BenchGSO-Bench–76.5%†
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)1498†1534†
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)1436†1616†
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench–83.9%
LiveCodeBenchVals AI81.9%82.6%
IOIVals AI–91.2%
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI71.4%96.2%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)SWE-bench72.8%†–
SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold)SWE-bench72.8%†–
Code MigrationVals AI–52.9%
ProgramBenchVals AI–1.5%
Vibe Code Bench 1-100Vals AI–20.0%
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI23.4%80.5%
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAScale AI SEAL20.5%†46.0%†
SWE Atlas: RefactoringScale AI SEAL24.2%†–
SWE Atlas: Test WritingScale AI SEAL28.7%†45.9%†
MirrorCodeEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–20.0%†
Surface Evolver BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–93.1%†
DeepSWE v1.1Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–72.7%
CursorBenchCursor–41.7%
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub765.6†2176.9
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–32.2%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis–39.9%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis–88.0%
Startrise FrontendStartrise–66.2%†
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench52.4%†37.3%
OSWorld-Verified 2.0OSWorld–27.3%
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)–6.1†
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench–56.2%
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis43.2%65.9%
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis98.3%85.1%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI–85.8%
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL–32.3%†
τ²-benchτ²-bench81.0%–
τ³-bench Bankingτ²-bench9.8%46.9%†
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis–44.3%
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis–56.2%
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis–47.5%
APEX-Agents (AA)Artificial Analysis14.4%–
CUA-benchVals AI–8.3%
CyberBenchVals AI–76.3%
Finance Agent v2Vals AI–53.8%
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI–2.5%
Legal Research BenchVals AI–48.1%
SkillsBenchVals AI–54.1%
SREBenchVals AI–30.5%
Tax Agent BenchVals AI–31.1%
Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals)Vals AI49.4%–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI–37.9%
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI–20.0%
Time Horizon Index: KSPVals AI–23.8%
Web Search IndexVals AI–43.6%
Arena SearchArena (LMArena)–1258†
BALROGBALROG–60.0%
PostTrainBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–36.2%
GBAEvalEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–52.6%†
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs4432.1†9619.4†
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis–60.1%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis–27.2%
EnterpriseOps-GymArtificial Analysis–42.9%
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis–1478
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis–22.4%
FACTS SearchGoogle–88.5%†
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–89.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–82.9%
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub80.0%†100.0%
ProofBenchVals AI–83.0%
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench–96.2%
AIME (Vals)Vals AI91.7%–
AIME 2026MathArena96.7%†–
HMMT February 2026MathArena86.4%†–
USAMO 2026MathArena35.1%†–
MathArena ApexMathArena10.9%†–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)1443†1496†
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–69.7%
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench–79.8%
MMLU-ProVals AI86.0%89.1%
LegalBenchVals AI84.1%87.0%
CorpFinVals AI62.9%64.4%
TaxEvalVals AI70.0%74.8%
MedQAVals AI94.3%–
PRBench FinanceScale AI SEAL–50.5%
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL–50.5%
BioMysteryBenchVals AI–71.1%
CaseLaw v2Vals AI52.5%–
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI–72.3%
MedCodeVals AI–44.0%
MedScribeVals AI–85.2%
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI–66.5%
DrugDiscoveryBenchScale AI SEAL–56.5%
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–44.8%
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–30.7%
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench–87.7%
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench–71.8%
IFBenchArtificial Analysis72.3%72.7%
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)1446†1491†
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)1457†1485†
EQ-Bench 4EQ-Bench–1236†
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)1448†1470†
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)1472†1490†
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)1468†1499†
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)–1281†
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis–83.4%
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI–88.8%
MortgageTaxVals AI–67.3%
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–33.6%†
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis75.7%84.0%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)–1489†
MLCRArtificial Analysis–30.0%
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub145.8†162.8†
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench–81.0%
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis27.947.0
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis280.9331.5
Vals RSI IndexVals AI–23.9%
Vals Science IndexVals AI–41.5%
Vals Multimodal IndexVals AI–72.6%
Safety & honesty
FORTRESSScale AI SEAL–20.1%†

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-5.6 Sol (max): 2 new results (AA Progress Index v1, CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)).
  • 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).
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 1 new result (AA-Briefcase v1.1).
  • GLM-5 (thinking): cached input price moved from $0.15/M to $0.20/M (34% up).
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 3 new results (Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1, Vals RSI Index, Vals Science Index).

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

GLM-5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol: questions

Is GPT-5.6 Sol better than GLM-5?
GPT-5.6 Sol (max) leads on quality: 65.4 vs 60.2. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GPT-5.6 Sol (max) is ahead overall as of 29 Oct 2026, but check the category scores for your use.
GLM-5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol: which is cheaper, and will that change?
GLM-5 is cheaper today: $1.55 against $8.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Is GLM-5 or GPT-5.6 Sol better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher in coding (66 vs 59 on the category index, where 50 is average). On LiveCodeBench, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 81.9% for GLM-5 against 82.6% for GPT-5.6 Sol.
Which is faster, GLM-5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol streams faster (85 vs 69 output tokens per second, Artificial Analysis 7-day median).
Is GLM-5 or GPT-5.6 Sol better for agents and tool use?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher in agentic tasks (67 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Terminal-Bench Hard, the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 43.2% for GLM-5 against 65.9% for GPT-5.6 Sol.
More questions (4)
Which is better for long documents?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on long-context benchmarks (67 vs 63). GPT-5.6 Sol accepts more context: 1,050,000 against 204,800 tokens for GLM-5.
Which has lower latency?
GLM-5 answers first: 46.8 s against 86.2 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.
Do independent benchmarks agree on GLM-5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol?
Across the 16 benchmarks both have, GLM-5 leads 1, GPT-5.6 Sol leads 15. Every overall index that rates both puts GPT-5.6 Sol ahead.
When was GPT-5.6 Sol released?
GPT-5.6 Sol was released on 9 Jul 2026.