Compare / Claude Opus 4.1 vs GLM 5.2

Claude Opus 4.1 vs GLM 5.2

17 results from 3 sources that measured both models. Each row is in the source's own units; there is no overall winner.

Claude Opus 4.1
Anthropic · profile
GLM 5.2
Z.ai · profile
Results compared
17
Shared sources
3
BenchmarkMetricClaude Opus 4.1GLM 5.2
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,4351,463
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedBusiness, management and financeArena rating 1,4471,463
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedCreative writingArena rating 1,4451,455
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedExpert promptsArena rating 1,4821,500
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedInstruction followingArena rating 1,4581,470
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,4501,476
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedWriting, literature and languageArena rating 1,4461,459
Artificial AnalysisreportedArtificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score 22.833.7
Artificial AnalysisreportedGPQA Diamond% of questions 80.9%89.5%
Artificial AnalysisreportedHumanity's Last Exam% of questions 12.5%41.1%
Artificial AnalysisreportedIFBench% of instructions 55.4%73.3%
Artificial AnalysisreportedLong-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions 76.0%78.3%
Artificial AnalysisreportedTerminal-Bench Hard% of tasks 34.3%50.8%
Artificial AnalysisreportedΤ²-bench telecom% of tasks 71.4%99.1%
UGI LeaderboardreportedRequested-length error% off the requested word count 3.0%12.0%
UGI LeaderboardreportedStyle adherencescore from 0 to 1 0.380.37
UGI LeaderboardreportedWriting scorescore out of 100 69.967.0

Bold green marks the better value on that metric. Where a source reports ranges that overlap, the difference may not be meaningful; see the benchmark page for ranges.