Model comparison
GLM-4.5 vs Phi-4
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: GLM-4.5 #74 (Estimated); Phi-4 #202 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.5 and Phi-4 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to GLM-4.5; 11 to Phi-4.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- GLM-4.5 only
- 1
- Phi-4 only
- 11
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for GLM-4.5 and Phi-4 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 has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
GLM-4.5 is priced at $0.60 input / $2.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Phi-4. GLM-4.5 has the larger context window at 128K, compared with 16K for Phi-4.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GLM-4.5 | Phi-4 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.5$0.6 input / $2.2 output | Phi-4$0 input / $0 output | Phi-4 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.551 tok/s | Phi-435 tok/s | GLM-4.5 has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.51.45 s | Phi-42.02 s | GLM-4.5 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.5128K | Phi-416K | GLM-4.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Phi-4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 0% | Not comparable |
Coding1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Phi-4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 26.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Phi-4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 4.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 57.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 4.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -56.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 13.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Phi-4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1200 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Phi-4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 23.5% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare GLM-4.5 and Phi-4 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 GLM-4.5 and Phi-4 today?
GLM-4.5: $0.60 input / $2.20 output per 1M tokens Phi-4: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.