Model comparison
GLM-4.6 vs GPT-5.4
Head-to-head evidence from 14 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-5.4 #8 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.6 and GPT-5.4 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to GLM-4.6; 38 to GPT-5.4.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- GLM-4.6 only
- 0
- GPT-5.4 only
- 38
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GLM-4.6 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 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
GPT-5.4 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 74.24 to 55.12. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 42.5 against 3.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 3.819% to 47.600%.
GPT-5.4 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, 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 | GLM-4.6 | Δ | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GLM-4.63.4 | Margin→ 39.1 | GPT-5.442.5 |
| Agentic | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.477.2 |
| Coding | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.457.7 |
| Knowledge | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.457.6 |
| Multimodal | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.473.2 |
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 47.600%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 43.8FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GLM-4.6 scored 3.819%; GPT-5.4 scored 47.600%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 2.128%B 27.100%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 25FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GLM-4.6 scored 2.128%; GPT-5.4 scored 27.100%. GPT-5.4 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-5.4 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.6Not available | GPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.6Not available | GPT-5.474 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.6Not available | GPT-5.4151.79 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.6200K | GPT-5.41.05M | GPT-5.4 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 76.9% | 87.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 75.1% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 79.0% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 82.7% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 75% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 70.6% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 54.6% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 60.3% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 73.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 41.1% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 44.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1395 | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 64.89% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 15.3% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 6.0% | Not comparable |
Coding6 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 23.0% | 51.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 63.2% | 92.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 5.2% | 41.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -31.6% | 5.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 20.8% | 50.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 66.1% | 88.6% | GLM-4.6 leads |
| GPQASource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 52.1% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 39.8% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 40.1% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | — | 59.6% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | — | 48.1% | Not comparable |
MathGPT-5.4 wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 53.2% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 82.8% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 65.4% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 61.1% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 77.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.4% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1250 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 36.7% | 73.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GLM-4.6 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 74.24 to 55.12. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 3.819% and 47.600%.
Which is better for math, GLM-4.6 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 42.5 versus 3.4. 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.