Skip to content

GLM 5.1 vs GLM 5 Turbo

GLM 5.1

Zhipu AI

78#71
vs
GLM 5 Turbo

Zhipu AI

78#73
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalGLM 5.1DeltaGLM 5 Turbo
Capabilities
67
--
67
Benchmarks
76
-5
81
Pricing
97
+1
96
Context window size
84
+0
84
Recency
100
--
100
Output Capacity
85
0
85
Overall Result
2 wins
of 6
2 wins
It's a tie - both models win 2 signals each

Score History

Score History (19 data points)
GLM 5.1GLM 5 Turbo
GLM 5.1

78

current score

Leader

Tied

right now

GLM 5 Turbo

78

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

GLM 5.1

Zhipu AI

Best Value
Per request$0.002484
Daily$8.28
Monthly$248.40
Annual$2980.80

GLM 5 Turbo

Zhipu AI

Per request$0.003200
Daily$10.67
Monthly$320.00
Annual$3840.00

GLM 5.1 saves you $71.60/month

That's $859.20/year compared to GLM 5 Turbo at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

22% cheaper
Choose GLM 5.1 for cost optimization

GLM 5.1 pricing:
Input:$0.97/M tokens
Output:$3.04/M tokens
GLM 5 Turbo pricing:
Input:$1.20/M tokens
Output:$4.00/M tokens
Tie
GLM 5.1

Zhipu AI

78

Composite Score

Tie
GLM 5 Turbo

Zhipu AI

78

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricGLM 5.1GLM 5 TurboWinner
Overall Score
78
78
--
Rank#71#73
GLM 5.1
Quality Rank#71#73
GLM 5.1
Adoption Rank#71#73
GLM 5.1
Parameters------
Context Window205K203K
GLM 5.1
Pricing$0.97/$3.04/M$1.20/$4.00/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
67
67
GLM 5.1
Benchmarks
76
81
GLM 5 Turbo
Pricing
97
96
GLM 5.1
Context window size
84
84
GLM 5.1
Recency
100
100
GLM 5.1
Output Capacity
85
85
GLM 5 Turbo
Benchmark Head-to-Head(2 benchmarks)
GLM 5.1: 1GLM 5: 0
GLM 5.1
GLM 5
Normalized 0-100%
MMLU-Pro
-86%
Arena Elo
14691457
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

GLM 5.1Strong Performer

Scores 78/100 (rank #71), placing it in the top 76% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
GLM 5 TurboStrong Performer

Scores 78/100 (rank #73), placing it in the top 75% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose GLM 5.1 when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model

Choose GLM 5 Turbo when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
Cost-Performance Analysis
GLM 5.1Best Value
Input cost$0.97/M tokens
Output cost$3.04/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.051
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$60.03
GLM 5 Turbo
Input cost$1.20/M tokens
Output cost$4.00/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.067
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$78.00

GLM 5.1 offers 23% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $60.03/month with GLM 5.1 vs $78.00/month with GLM 5 Turbo - a $17.97 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
GLM 5.1Faster
Speed score0/100
GLM 5 Turbo
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

GLM 5.1

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. GLM 5.1 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

GLM 5.1

Long document analysis

Larger context window (205K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

GLM 5.1

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($3.04/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

GLM 5.1

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (78/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

GLM 5.1
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
GLM 5.1

GLM 5.1 and GLM 5 Turbo are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

GLM 5.1
Recommended

by Zhipu AI

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 23% lower pricing; better value at scale
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by Zhipu AI

Consider for specialized use cases.

Capability Comparison
CapabilityGLM 5.1GLM 5 Turbo
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

GLM 5.1

Zhipu AI

Best Value
$5.38
estimated monthly cost

GLM 5 Turbo

Zhipu AI

$6.96
estimated monthly cost

GLM 5.1 saves you $1.58/month

That's 23% cheaper than GLM 5 Turbo at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterGLM 5.1GLM 5 Turbo
Context Window205K203K
Max Output Tokens128,000131,072
Open SourceYesNo
CreatedApr 7, 2026Mar 15, 2026
Last updated: 14m ago

Related comparisons

GLM 5.1 vs GLM 5 Turbo (2026) | LM Market Cap