Model comparison
DeepSeek Coder 2.0 vs GLM-5
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek Coder 2.0 #114 (Estimated); GLM-5 #28 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek Coder 2.0 and GLM-5 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to DeepSeek Coder 2.0; 49 to GLM-5.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- DeepSeek Coder 2.0 only
- 0
- GLM-5 only
- 49
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for DeepSeek Coder 2.0 and GLM-5 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM does not have sourced benchmark coverage for DeepSeek Coder 2.0 yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.
GLM-5 has the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for DeepSeek Coder 2.0.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek Coder 2.0 | GLM-5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek Coder 2.0Not available | GLM-5$1 input / $3.2 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek Coder 2.0Not available | GLM-574 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek Coder 2.0Not available | GLM-51.64 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek Coder 2.0128K | GLM-5200K | GLM-5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 2.0 | GLM-5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 56.2% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 57.7% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 54.1% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 65.6% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 14.6% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 38% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 31.1% | Not comparable |
| MCP-TasksSource | — | 60.8% | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | — | 69.8% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 98.2% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 43.2% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 14.5% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 50.99% | Not comparable |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 2.0 | GLM-5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 77.8% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench Verified*Source | — | 72.8% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 55.1% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 73.3% | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | — | 62.8% | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | — | 74.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 46.2% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 2.0 | GLM-5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | — | 86% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 86.0% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 66.8% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source | — | 85.8% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 50.4% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 39.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 82.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 27.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 2.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 26.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 34.0% | Not comparable |
Math8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 2.0 | GLM-5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | — | 95.8% | Not comparable |
| AIME25 (Arcee)Source | — | 93.3% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | — | 97.5% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | — | 96.9% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | — | 86.4% | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | — | 82.5% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | — | 16.434% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | — | 2.100% | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 2.0 | GLM-5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1278 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare DeepSeek Coder 2.0 and GLM-5 on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for DeepSeek Coder 2.0 and GLM-5 today?
DeepSeek Coder 2.0: Pricing unavailable GLM-5: $1.00 input / $3.20 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.