Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026
In this head-to-head showdown, Claude Opus 4.5 delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,568 vs 1,475), while Claude Opus 4.5 leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (76.8%), while Z.ai: GLM 5V Turbo is more budget-friendly at $4/1M per 1M output tokens. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.
10 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost
Anthropic frontier coding and computer-use model. SWE-bench leader on the official mini-SWE-agent harness in the Feb 2026 refresh.
Auto-discovered from OpenRouter (z-ai/glm-5v-turbo). Preview until a second source matches.
Simulate accuracy gains vs added response time & token cost
Reasoning models “think before answering” by generating internal reasoning tokens. Higher effort improves math, coding, and logic accuracy, but increases response delay and token costs.
Δ 93 Arena Elo pts
112 tok/s
$4 / 1M output
Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.
Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.
Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.
Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy
Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness
Cost per million tokens and max context window length
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Z.ai: GLM 5V Turbo | Advantage Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preference Elo | +93 | ||
| Coding Elo | +92 | ||
| LiveBench | +7.4% | ||
| SWE-bench | +11.6% | ||
| GPQA Diamond | +6.7% | ||
| Time to first token | +200 ms | ||
| Output speed | 62 tok/s | 112 tok/s | +50 tok/s |
| Input price | $1.2/1M | +$3.8/1M | |
| Output price | +$21/1M | ||
| Context window | +3k |
Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).
Z.ai: GLM 5V Turbo is estimated to save $448.00/month ($5,376/year).
Higher SWE-bench (76.8%).
Lower output list price ($4/1M).
Lower TTFT (180 ms).
Larger window (203k).
Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Claude Opus 4.5).
| Target Workload | Recommended Pick | Evaluation Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Repo / coding agents | Claude Opus 4.5 | Higher SWE-bench (76.8%). |
| High-volume chat | Z.ai: GLM 5V Turbo | Lower output list price ($4/1M). |
| Voice / low-latency UI | Z.ai: GLM 5V Turbo | Lower TTFT (180 ms). |
| Long-document RAG | Z.ai: GLM 5V Turbo | Larger window (203k). |
| Screenshots / vision | Claude Opus 4.5 | Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Claude Opus 4.5). |
No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!
Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/claude-opus-4-5-vs-glm-5v-turbo/opengraph-image
Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry
