Claude Opus 5 vs GLM 5
| Signal | Claude Opus 5 | Delta | GLM 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | +33 | |
Pricing | 75 | -22 | |
Context window size | 95 | +11 | |
Recency | 100 | +14 | |
Output Capacity | 82 | 0 | |
Benchmarks | 0 | -69 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 3 wins |
Score History
95.1
current score
Claude Opus 5
right now
68.3
current score
Claude Opus 5
Anthropic
GLM 5
Zhipu AI
GLM 5 saves you $1490.00/month
That's $17880.00/year compared to Claude Opus 5 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 | GLM 5 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 95 | 68 | Claude Opus 5 |
| Rank | #6 | #141 | Claude Opus 5 |
| Quality Rank | #6 | #141 | Claude Opus 5 |
| Adoption Rank | #6 | #141 | Claude Opus 5 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1000K | 205K | Claude Opus 5 |
| Pricing | $5.00/$25.00/M | $1.00/$3.20/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 67 | Claude Opus 5 |
| Pricing | 75 | 97 | GLM 5 |
| Context window size | 95 | 84 | Claude Opus 5 |
| Recency | 100 | 86 | Claude Opus 5 |
| Output Capacity | 82 | 82 | GLM 5 |
| Benchmarks | -- | 69 | GLM 5 |
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.
Scores 95/100 (rank #6), placing it in the top 98% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 68/100 (rank #141), placing it in the top 52% of all 290 models tracked.
Claude Opus 5 has a 27-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Choose Claude Opus 5 when you need:
- Processing long documents or large codebases (1000K token context)
- Multimodal workflows that require image understanding
- Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
Choose GLM 5 when you need:
- High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
- Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
- Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
GLM 5 offers 86% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $63.00/month with GLM 5 vs $450.00/month with Claude Opus 5 - a $387.00 monthly difference.
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.
Code generation & review
Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. GLM 5 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (1000K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($3.20/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (95/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Claude Opus 5 clearly outperforms GLM 5 with a significant 26.799999999999997-point lead. For most general use cases, Claude Opus 5 is the stronger choice. However, GLM 5 may still excel in niche scenarios.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
Claude Opus 5
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
GLM 5
86% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Claude Opus 5
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Claude Opus 5
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Claude Opus 5
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Anthropic
- Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
- 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
| Capability | Claude Opus 5 | GLM 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
Claude Opus 5
Anthropic
GLM 5
Zhipu AI
GLM 5 saves you $33.36/month
That's 86% cheaper than Claude Opus 5 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.
| Parameter | Claude Opus 5 | GLM 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1M | 205K |
| Max Output Tokens | 128,000 | 131,072 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Jul 24, 2026 | Feb 11, 2026 |