Model comparison
GLM-4.6 vs o3
Head-to-head evidence from 13 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); o3 #131 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.6 and o3 share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to GLM-4.6; 3 to o3.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- GLM-4.6 only
- 1
- o3 only
- 3
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GLM-4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o3 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.
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 47.89. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
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 | o3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GLM-4.63.4 | Margin→ 11.1 | o314.5 |
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 18.685%Winner: o3Δ 14.9FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GLM-4.6 scored 3.819%; o3 scored 18.685%. o3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 2.128%B 2.083%Winner: GLM-4.6Δ 0FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GLM-4.6 scored 2.128%; o3 scored 2.083%. 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 | o3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.6Not available | o3$2 input / $8 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.6Not available | o3118 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.6Not available | o35.38 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.6200K | o3200K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 76.9% | 80.7% | o3 leads |
Coding2 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 23.0% | 30.4% | o3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 63.2% | 82.7% | o3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 5.2% | 20.0% | o3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -31.6% | -15.3% | o3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 20.8% | 38.4% | o3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 66.1% | 87.1% | GLM-4.6 leads |
Matho3 wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 36.7% | 71.4% | o3 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GLM-4.6 or o3?
GLM-4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.12 to 47.89. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 3.819% and 18.685%.
Which is better for math, GLM-4.6 or o3?
o3 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 14.5 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.