GLM-5 vs GLM-5.1
Too close to call on our weighted score (GLM-5.1 57, GLM-5 55). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (GLM-5.1 57/100, GLM-5 55/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-5.1 for raw capability, GLM-5 on price and GLM-5 for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityGLM-5.1Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-5.1 149.9 · GLM-5 145.8
- Lowest priceGLM-5GLM-5 $1.55 · GLM-5.1 $2.15 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGLM-5GLM-5 204,800 · GLM-5.1 200,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGLM-5: Text · GLM-5.1: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | GLM-5 | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 73 | 78 |
| Price | 25% | 41 | 34 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 45 |
| Context window | 10% | 32 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 57/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification |  GLM-5Z.ai (Zhipu) | GLM-5.1Z.ai (Zhipu) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 145.8 | 149.9 (best) |
| ECI rank | #74 of 148 | #51 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 87.8% | 89.9% (best) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 36.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 80.0% | 93.3% (best) |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 72.1% | 74.2% (best) |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 34.0% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.00 (best) | $1.40 |
| Output | $3.20 (best) | $4.40 |
| Cached input | $0.20 (best) | $0.26 |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.55 (best) | $2.15 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Official Z.AI API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens (best) | 200,000 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | glm-5 | glm-5.1 |
| API providers | 27 | 40 (best) |
| Released | Feb 12, 2026 | Apr 7, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GLM-5$16.40
- GLM-5.1$22.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-5 or GLM-5.1?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (GLM-5.1 57/100, GLM-5 55/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-5.1 for raw capability, GLM-5 on price and GLM-5 for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5 or GLM-5.1?
GLM-5 is cheaper at $1.00 input / $3.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). GLM-5.1 costs $1.40 input / $4.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.55 per million tokens for GLM-5 versus $2.15 for GLM-5.1 (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-5.1 149.9 (#51 of 148) and GLM-5 145.8 (#74 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (148.0–151.6 vs 143.9–147.7), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GLM-5.1 89.9%, GLM-5 87.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — GLM-5.1 93.3%, GLM-5 80.0%; SWE-bench Verified — GLM-5.1 74.2%, GLM-5 72.1%.
Which is better for coding?
GLM-5.1 resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: GLM-5.1 74.2% and GLM-5 72.1%. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-5 has the largest context window at 204,800 tokens, against 200,000 for GLM-5.1. Maximum output per response: GLM-5 up to 131,072, GLM-5.1 up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-5 accepts text; GLM-5.1 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
GLM-5.1 is the newest, released Apr 7, 2026. GLM-5 came out Feb 12, 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3.5 397B-A17BThree-way comparison
- GLM-5 vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 146.7
- GLM-5 vs Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI · ECI 146.0
- GLM-5 vs GPT-5.4 miniOpenAI · ECI 148.8
- GLM-5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
- GLM-5.1 vs Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI · ECI 150.0
- GLM-5.1 vs Qwen3.6 Max PreviewAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 149.2
