Skip to main content

Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs GPT-4.1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

55.12/100
Margin
4.0pts
← winning
OpenAI
51.11/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.6 #85 (Supported); GPT-4.1 #108 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GLM-4.6 and GPT-4.1 share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to GLM-4.6; 7 to GPT-4.1.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
13
GLM-4.6 only
1
GPT-4.1 only
7
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick GLM-4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GLM-4.6 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 55.12 to 51.11. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GLM-4.6 is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-4.1 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for GLM-4.6.

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 GLM-4.6 and GPT-4.1
CategoryGLM-4.6ΔGPT-4.1
MathGLM-4.63.4Margin 0.7GPT-4.14.1
CodingGLM-4.6Not measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-4.154.6
KnowledgeGLM-4.6Not measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-4.166.3
Inst. FollowingGLM-4.6Not measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-4.187.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · GLM-4.6B · GPT-4.1
  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 2.128%B 0.000%
    Winner: GLM-4.6Δ 2.1
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GLM-4.6 scored 2.128%; GPT-4.1 scored 0.000%. GLM-4.6 wins this benchmark.
  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 3.819%B 5.517%
    Winner: GPT-4.1Δ 1.7
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GLM-4.6 scored 3.819%; GPT-4.1 scored 5.517%. GPT-4.1 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGLM-4.6GPT-4.1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGLM-4.6Not availableGPT-4.1$2 input / $8 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGLM-4.6Not availableGPT-4.1108 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGLM-4.6Not availableGPT-4.11.02 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGLM-4.6200KGPT-4.11MGPT-4.1 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-4.1Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 76.9%47.1%GLM-4.6 leads
Gert LabsSource 25.65%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-4.1Result
Vibe Code BenchSource 3.09%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 33.1%38.1%GPT-4.1 leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 54.6%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-4.1Result
AA-LCRSource 26.3%61.0%GPT-4.1 leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.0%Tie
Knowledge
BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-4.1Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 23.0%19.4%GLM-4.6 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 63.2%66.6%GPT-4.1 leads
AA-HLESource 5.2%4.6%GLM-4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -31.6%-36.2%GLM-4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 20.8%24.2%GPT-4.1 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 66.1%79.6%GLM-4.6 leads
MMLUSource 90.2%Not comparable
GPQASource 66.3%Not comparable
MathGPT-4.1 wins
BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-4.1Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 3.819%5.517%GPT-4.1 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 2.128%0.000%GLM-4.6 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-4.1Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 61.2%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1068Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGLM-4.6GPT-4.1Result
AA-IFBenchSource 36.7%43.0%GPT-4.1 leads
IFEvalSource 87.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GLM-4.6 or GPT-4.1?

GLM-4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.12 to 51.11. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4), where the scores are 2.128% and 0.000%.

Which is better for math, GLM-4.6 or GPT-4.1?

GPT-4.1 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 4.1 versus 3.4. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 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.