Model Comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs GLM-5Which is better in 2026?

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks. GLM-5 is 3.9x cheaper per token.

Verdict: Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs GLM-5 — which is better?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 (by Anthropic) and GLM-5 (by Zhipu AI) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0), while GLM-5 is better at 2 benchmarks (BrowseComp, MCP Atlas). Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

On price, GLM-5 is roughly 3.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 if…

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026

Choose GLM-5 if…

  • cost matters — it's about 3.9x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

Claude Sonnet 4.6 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0), while GLM-5 is better at 2 benchmarks (BrowseComp, MCP Atlas).

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

Tue Jul 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GLM-5 costs less

For input processing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 3.0x more expensive than GLM-5 ($1.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 4.7x more expensive than GLM-5 ($3.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 4.6 is more expensive than GLM-5.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Jul 28 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input tokens$1.00
Output tokens$3.20
Best providerFriendliAI
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 200,000 tokens. GLM-5 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 is limited to 64,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Tue Jul 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports multimodal inputs, whereas GLM-5 does not.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

GLM-5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while GLM-5 uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

GLM-5

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 4.6 was released on 2026-02-17, while GLM-5 was released on 2026-02-11.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is 0 month newer than GLM-5.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Feb 17, 2026

5 months ago

6d newer
GLM-5

Feb 11, 2026

5 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is available from Anthropic. GLM-5 is available from FriendliAI, ZAI.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

GLM-5

friendli logo
FriendliAI
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (79.6% vs 77.8%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (59.1% vs 56.2%)
Zhipu AI
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher BrowseComp score (75.9% vs 74.7%)
Higher MCP Atlas score (67.8% vs 61.3%)

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 4.6 and GLM-5 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 4.6
✓ Preferred
GLM-5
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Zhipu AI
GLM-5

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs GLM-5.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or GLM-5?

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is made by Anthropic and GLM-5 is made by Zhipu AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude Sonnet 4.6 compare to GLM-5 in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores Tau2 Telecom: 97.9%, Tau2 Retail: 91.7%, GPQA: 89.9%, MMMLU: 89.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 79.6%. GLM-5 scores t2-bench: 89.7%, SWE-Bench Verified: 77.8%, BrowseComp: 75.9%, MCP Atlas: 67.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.0: 56.2%.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 cheaper than GLM-5?

GLM-5 is 3.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. GLM-5 costs $1.00/M input and $3.20/M output via friendli.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and GLM-5?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 200K tokens and GLM-5 supports 200K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Sonnet 4.6 and GLM-5?

Key differences include input pricing ($3.00 vs $1.00/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 4.6 and GLM-5?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and GLM-5 is developed by Zhipu AI.

Related comparisons