Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek-R1 vs GLM-5

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

DeepSeek
51.67/100
Margin
14.4pts
winning →
Z.AI
66.06/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek-R1 #103 (Supported); GLM-5 #28 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek-R1 and GLM-5 share 11 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to DeepSeek-R1; 38 to GLM-5.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
11
DeepSeek-R1 only
0
GLM-5 only
38
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for DeepSeek-R1 and GLM-5 is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 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 has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

GLM-5 is priced at $1.00 input / $3.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.55 input / $2.19 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek-R1. GLM-5 has the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for DeepSeek-R1.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for DeepSeek-R1 and GLM-5
CategoryDeepSeek-R1ΔGLM-5
AgenticDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapGLM-556.2
CodingDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapGLM-566.3
ReasoningDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapGLM-560.8
KnowledgeDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapGLM-566.4
MathDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapGLM-556.3
MultilingualDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapGLM-583.1
Inst. FollowingDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapGLM-592.6

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek-R1$0.55 input / $2.19 outputGLM-5$1 input / $3.2 outputDeepSeek-R1 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek-R1Not availableGLM-574 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek-R1Not availableGLM-51.64 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek-R1128KGLM-5200KGLM-5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 36.5%98.2%GLM-5 leads
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
CyberGymSource 43.2%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 14.5%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 50.99%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Result
AA-SciCodeSource 40.3%46.2%GLM-5 leads
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
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Result
AA-LCRSource 54.7%63.3%GLM-5 leads
CritPtSource 1.4%2.0%GLM-5 leads
LongBench v2Source 60.8%Not comparable
AI-NeedleSource 63.3%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 20.1%39.5%GLM-5 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 81.3%82.0%GLM-5 leads
AA-HLESource 14.9%27.2%GLM-5 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -27.1%2.0%GLM-5 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 31.0%26.9%DeepSeek-R1 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 84.0%34.0%GLM-5 leads
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
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Result
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
Multilingual
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Result
MMLU-ProXSource 83.1%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 55.1%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1280Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1GLM-5Result
AA-IFBenchSource 39.6%72.3%GLM-5 leads
IFEvalSource 92.6%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare DeepSeek-R1 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-R1 and GLM-5 today?

DeepSeek-R1: $0.55 input / $2.19 output per 1M tokens 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.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

DeepSeek-R1
API / mo$2,055
Self-host / mo$18,221
Break-even583M/day
GLM-5
API / mo$3,150
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 20, 2026

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.