Claude Opus 4.6 vs GLM-5
Claude Opus 4.6 (2026) and GLM-5 (2026) are frontier-tier reasoning models from Anthropic and Zhipu AI. Claude Opus 4.6 ships a 1m-token context window, while GLM-5 ships a 200k-token context window. On MMLU PRO, Claude Opus 4.6 leads by 3.1 pts. On pricing, GLM-5 costs $0.60/1M input tokens versus $5/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
GLM-5 is ~733% cheaper at $0.60/1M; pay for Claude Opus 4.6 only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Opus 4.6 | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents | reasoning-heavy apps, tool-calling agents, and provider-routed production |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 1m | 200k |
| Cheapest output | $25/1M tokens | $2.08/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 6 tracked | 7 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | MMLU PRO leader | 9 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Opus 4.6 holds a shared-benchmark lead on MMLU PRO, ahead by 3.1 points.
- Claude Opus 4.6 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Claude Opus 4.6 uniquely exposes Vision, Multimodal, and Code execution in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Claude Opus 4.6 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- GLM-5 holds a shared-benchmark lead on SWE-bench Pro, ahead by 1.7 points.
- GLM-5 has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $2.08/1M tokens.
- GLM-5 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Local decision data tags GLM-5 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Claude Opus 4.6
$10,250
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Anthropic
GLM-5
$1,000
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $9,250. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter, GCP Vertex AI, and Vercel AI Gateway; start route-level A/B tests there.
- GLM-5 is $22.92/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision, Multimodal, and Code execution before moving production traffic.
- Provider overlap exists on GCP Vertex AI, OpenRouter, and Vercel AI Gateway; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Opus 4.6 is $22.92/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Claude Opus 4.6 adds Vision, Multimodal, and Code execution in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-02-05 | 2026-02-11 |
| Context window | 1m | 200k |
| Parameters | — | 744B total, 40B active |
| Architecture | decoder only | mixture of experts |
| License | Proprietary | MIT(OSI) |
| Openness | Proprietary | Open source |
| Commercial use | Commercial use with conditions | Commercial use allowed |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-12 | 2025-11 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Opus 4.6 | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $5/1M tokens | $0.60/1M tokens |
| Output price | $25/1M tokens | $2.08/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Opus 4.6 | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | No |
| Multimodal | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU PRO | 89.1 | 86.0 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.8 | 77.8 |
| SWE-bench Pro | 53.4 | 55.1 |
| Google-Proof Q&A | 91.3 | 86.0 |
| AIME 2025 | 94.2 | 92.7 |
| LiveCodeBench | 70.2 | 81.9 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 53.0 | 30.5 |
| τ-bench | 84.8 | 82.1 |
| SWE-rebench | 65.3 | 62.8 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Claude Opus 4.6 at 89.1 and GLM-5 at 86, with Claude Opus 4.6 ahead by 3.1 points; SWE-bench Verified has Claude Opus 4.6 at 80.8 and GLM-5 at 77.8, with Claude Opus 4.6 ahead by 3 points; SWE-bench Pro has Claude Opus 4.6 at 53.4 and GLM-5 at 55.1, with GLM-5 ahead by 1.7 points. The largest visible gap is 3.1 points on MMLU PRO, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Claude Opus 4.6, multimodal input: Claude Opus 4.6, and code execution: Claude Opus 4.6. Both models share reasoning mode, function calling, tool use, and structured outputs, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
For cost, Claude Opus 4.6 lists $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while GLM-5 lists $0.60/1M input and $2.08/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts GLM-5 lower by about $9.96 per million blended tokens. Availability is 6 providers versus 7, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Opus 4.6 when coding workflow support and larger context windows are central to the workload. Choose GLM-5 when provider fit, lower input-token cost, and broader provider choice are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.6 or GLM-5?
Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1m tokens, while GLM-5 supports 200k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or GLM-5?
GLM-5 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens. GLM-5 costs $0.60/1M input and $2.08/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or GLM-5 open source?
Claude Opus 4.6 is listed under Proprietary. GLM-5 is listed under MIT. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Claude Opus 4.6 or GLM-5?
Claude Opus 4.6 has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for multimodal input, Claude Opus 4.6 or GLM-5?
Claude Opus 4.6 has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Claude Opus 4.6 and GLM-5?
Claude Opus 4.6 is available on Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, GCP Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, and OpenRouter. GLM-5 is available on Fireworks AI, OpenRouter, Together AI, GCP Vertex AI, and NVIDIA NIM. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-22. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.