Model comparison
GLM-4.6 vs GPT-4o
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.6 #85 (Supported); GPT-4o #165 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.6 and GPT-4o share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to GLM-4.6; 1 to GPT-4o.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- GLM-4.6 only
- 2
- GPT-4o only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GLM-4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4o only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 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 41.49. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-4.6's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 3.4 against 0.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 3.819% to 0.345%.
GLM-4.6 is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4o 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. GLM-4.6 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for GPT-4o.
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 | GLM-4.6 | Δ | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GLM-4.63.4 | Margin← 3.1 | GPT-4o0.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 3.819%B 0.345%Winner: GLM-4.6Δ 3.5FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GLM-4.6 scored 3.819%; GPT-4o scored 0.345%. GLM-4.6 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GLM-4.6 | GPT-4o | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.6Not available | GPT-4o$2.5 input / $10 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.6Not available | GPT-4o131 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.6Not available | GPT-4o0.81 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.6200K | GPT-4o128K | GLM-4.6 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-4o | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 76.9% | 25.1% | GLM-4.6 leads |
Coding2 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-4o | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 23.0% | 11.2% | GLM-4.6 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 63.2% | 54.3% | GLM-4.6 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 5.2% | 3.3% | GLM-4.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -31.6% | -10.7% | GPT-4o leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 20.8% | 19.7% | GLM-4.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 66.1% | 37.9% | GPT-4o leads |
MathGLM-4.6 wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-4o | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 861 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-4o | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 36.7% | 34.3% | GLM-4.6 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GLM-4.6 or GPT-4o?
GLM-4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.12 to 41.49. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 3.819% and 0.345%.
Which is better for math, GLM-4.6 or GPT-4o?
GLM-4.6 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 3.4 versus 0.3. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.