LLM Comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GLM 5.1 Thinking: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side Claude Opus 4.7 vs GLM 5.1 Thinking comparison across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, context window, and AskClash RWT. Green marks the winner on each benchmark.

Open live leaderboardClaude Opus 4.7 model pageGLM 5.1 Thinking model page
Rank #6 vs #25AskClash overall scores 76.3 vs 50.5.
Pricing $5.00/$25.0 vs $0/$0Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.
Proprietary vs ProprietaryAnthropic vs Zhipu AI.

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GLM 5.1 Thinking benchmark comparison

Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.

MetricClaude Opus 4.7GLM 5.1 Thinking
Overall Score76.350.5
Leaderboard Rank#6#25
RWT8.5—
Coding Agent Index50.336.1
HLE54.752.3
GPQA94.286.2
SWE-bench87.6—
SWE-Pro64.358.4
Terminal-Bench69.463.5
OSWorld78.0—
MCP Atlas77.371.8
Finance Agent64.444.8
CharXiv91.0—
MMMU-Pro75.2—
ARC-AGI 275.8—
Tau288.697.7
Input Price (per 1M tokens)$5.00$0
Output Price (per 1M tokens)$25.0$0
Context Window1M203K
Benchmarks Published149

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GLM 5.1 Thinking head-to-head charts

Claude Opus 4.7 leads 8 and GLM 5.1 Thinking leads 1 of 9 shared benchmarks. GLM 5.1 Thinking is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

Claude Opus 4.7GLM 5.1 Thinking
Overall
76.3Claude Opus 4.7
50.5GLM 5.1 Thinking
Coding Agent Index
50.3Claude Opus 4.7
36.1GLM 5.1 Thinking
HLE
54.7Claude Opus 4.7
52.3GLM 5.1 Thinking
GPQA
94.2Claude Opus 4.7
86.2GLM 5.1 Thinking
SWE-Pro
64.3Claude Opus 4.7
58.4GLM 5.1 Thinking
Terminal-Bench
69.4Claude Opus 4.7
63.5GLM 5.1 Thinking
MCP Atlas
77.3Claude Opus 4.7
71.8GLM 5.1 Thinking
Finance Agent
64.4Claude Opus 4.7
44.8GLM 5.1 Thinking
Tau2
88.6Claude Opus 4.7
97.7GLM 5.1 Thinking
Claude Opus 4.7
Input$5.00
Output$25.0
Workload$10
Context1M
GLM 5.1 Thinking
Input$0
Output$0
Workload$0.00
Context203K

Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.

More Claude Opus 4.7 and GLM 5.1 Thinking comparisons

Explore how Claude Opus 4.7 and GLM 5.1 Thinking stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Opus 4.7Claude Opus 5 vs GLM 5.1 ThinkingClaude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.7Claude Fable 5 vs GLM 5.1 ThinkingGPT-5.6 Sol vs Claude Opus 4.7GPT-5.6 Sol vs GLM 5.1 ThinkingClaude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.7Claude Opus 4.8 vs GLM 5.1 ThinkingKimi K3 vs Claude Opus 4.7Kimi K3 vs GLM 5.1 Thinking

How to read this comparison

Benchmark scores

Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.

Token pricing

Lower is better for input and output prices. Green marks the cheaper model per 1M tokens.

Coverage matters

Models with fewer disclosed benchmark cells may have inflated percentile scores. Check the benchmark cell count for context.

This comparison page is generated from the AskClash LLM leaderboard cache. Open the live leaderboard for real-time scores and interactive filtering.