live
weekly refresh
basedagi.org
▸ compare

Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5

Side-by-side benchmark comparison based on independent public data. Scores, pricing, context, and task breakdown.

▸ verdict
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6
95.9
higher score
vs
Z.ai: GLM 5
85.0
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 leads with a higher composite benchmark score. It's the stronger choice for general-purpose tasks based on public benchmark data.
▸ score breakdown
TaskAnthropic: Claude Opus 4.6Z.ai: GLM 5Δ
Overall95.985.0+10.9
Coding70.964.7+6.2
Reasoning
Math
Writing
JSON
▸ specs & pricing
AttributeAnthropic: Claude Opus 4.6Z.ai: GLM 5
ProviderAnthropicZ Ai
Context window1M203K
Input $/M tokens$5.00/M$0.60/M
Output $/M tokens$25.00/M$1.92/M
Weightsproprietaryproprietary
▸ frequently asked

Is Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 better than Z.ai: GLM 5?

Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher overall (95.9 vs 85.0) in the benchmark composite. The best choice depends on the specific use case and budget.

Which is cheaper: Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 or Z.ai: GLM 5?

Z.ai: GLM 5 is cheaper at $0.6/M input tokens vs $5/M for Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6.

Which model is better for coding?

Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 leads on coding with a score of 70.9 vs 64.7 for Z.ai: GLM 5. This is based on SWE-Bench, Aider Polyglot, and LiveCodeBench data.