Model Comparison

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

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

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

GLM-5 (by Zhipu AI) and Claude Sonnet 4.6 (by Anthropic) 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.

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

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

Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 if…

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

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

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

Mon Jun 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GLM-5 costs less

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

For output processing, GLM-5 ($3.20/1M tokens) is 4.7x cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($15.00/1M 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
Mon Jun 15 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input tokens$1.00
Output tokens$3.20
Best providerFriendliAI
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
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.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Mon Jun 15 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.

GLM-5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

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

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

GLM-5

MIT

Open weights

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

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

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

GLM-5

Feb 11, 2026

4 months ago

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Feb 17, 2026

3 months ago

6d newer

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

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

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

Claude Sonnet 4.6

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

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%)
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%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6.

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

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

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

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%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores Tau2 Telecom: 97.9%, Tau2 Retail: 91.7%, GPQA: 89.9%, MMMLU: 89.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 79.6%.

Is GLM-5 cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4.6?

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

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

GLM-5 supports 200K tokens and Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 GLM-5 and Claude Sonnet 4.6?

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

Who makes GLM-5 and Claude Sonnet 4.6?

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

Related comparisons