▸ compare
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 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 4.7
95.4
higher score
vs
Z.ai: GLM 5
86.2
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 leads with a higher composite benchmark score. It's the stronger choice for general-purpose tasks based on public benchmark data.
▸ score breakdown
| Task | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 | Z.ai: GLM 5 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 95.4 | 86.2 | +9.2 |
| Coding | 73.2 | 64.7 | +8.5 |
| Reasoning | 68.3 | — | — |
| Math | — | — | — |
| Writing | — | — | — |
| JSON | — | — | — |
▸ specs & pricing
| Attribute | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 | Z.ai: GLM 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z Ai |
| Context window | 1M | 203K |
| Input $/M tokens | $5.00/M | $0.60/M |
| Output $/M tokens | $25.00/M | $1.92/M |
| Weights | proprietary | proprietary |
▸ frequently asked
Is Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 better than Z.ai: GLM 5?
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher overall (95.4 vs 86.2) in the benchmark composite. The best choice depends on the specific use case and budget.
Which is cheaper: Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 or Z.ai: GLM 5?
Z.ai: GLM 5 is cheaper at $0.6/M input tokens vs $5/M for Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7.
Which model is better for coding?
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 leads on coding with a score of 73.2 vs 64.7 for Z.ai: GLM 5. This is based on SWE-Bench, Aider Polyglot, and LiveCodeBench data.