Claude Opus 4.8
VS
GLM 5
Claude Opus 4.8 vs GLM 5: which wins at real work?
22 task areas · same graded test runs · rank comparison only, so 0–100 and Elo collections never mix raw scores.
Claude Opus 4.8 wins 21 of 22 task areas we tested; GLM 5 takes 1. GLM 5 costs 11.9× less per token ($2.52 vs $30 per 1M).
GLM 5 costs 11.9× less per token ($2.52 vs $30 per 1M).
Task by task
| Task area | Claude Opus 4.8 | GLM 5 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sales |
#1
/ 110
Strong
|
#68
/ 110
Usable
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Training & Education |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#67
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| AI Strategy |
#4
/ 126
Strong
|
#66
/ 126
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Product & Project Management |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#58
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Creative & Comedy | #17 / 110 | #72 / 110 | Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Frontend & Landing Pages |
#21
/ 109
Needs editing
|
#76
/ 109
Weak
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Executive Assistant |
#9
/ 112
Strong
|
#62
/ 112
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Content & Brand |
#8
/ 124
Strong
|
#60
/ 124
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Landing Pages |
#18
/ 72
Strong
|
#69
/ 72
Needs editing
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Chef / Home Cooking |
#9
/ 126
Strong
|
#57
/ 126
Usable
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Research & Competitive Analysis |
#5
/ 110
Excellent
|
#48
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Data & Analytics |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#43
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| RAG, Safety & Grounding |
#11
/ 113
Excellent
|
#47
/ 113
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Investor & Pitch |
#27
/ 66
Strong
|
#62
/ 66
Usable
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Coding |
#3
/ 115
Excellent
|
#36
/ 115
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Structured Output |
#61
/ 113
Excellent
|
#94
/ 113
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Legal & HR |
#5
/ 110
Excellent
|
#37
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Customer Support |
#8
/ 113
Strong
|
#35
/ 113
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Knowledge & Docs |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#24
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Presentations & Decks |
#32
/ 110
Excellent
|
#49
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Summarization & Meeting Notes |
#35
/ 110
Excellent
|
#48
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Translation & Localization |
#35
/ 110
Excellent
|
#26
/ 110
Excellent
|
GLM 5 |
Rank = position among every model config we tested in that task area (lower is better). Sorted by biggest gap first.
Same task, both models — judged
Both models answered the same test case; an independent judge graded each. Quotes are the judge's actual rationale.
Sales
Enterprise MEDDIC discovery plan (Discovery Call Prep)
“The model delivered an expert-level, production-ready response. It followed all constraints perfectly, including the exact number and weighting of questions (SPIN framework), and provided highly specific, tailored MEDDIC criteria. The only minor area for improvement is the lack of an explicitly formulated value hypothesis prior to the call, though it is strongly implied throughout the agenda and questions.”
“The response provides a structured approach but suffers from cliché, leading, and closed questions, and lacks an explicitly framed value hypothesis.”
Frequently asked
Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GLM 5?
Across 22 task areas we benchmarked, Claude Opus 4.8 ranks higher in 21 and GLM 5 in 1.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or GLM 5?
GLM 5 costs 11.9× less per token ($2.52 vs $30 per 1M).
What is Claude Opus 4.8 better at?
Claude Opus 4.8 out-ranks GLM 5 at Sales, Training & Education, AI Strategy.
What is GLM 5 better at?
GLM 5 out-ranks Claude Opus 4.8 at Translation & Localization.
More comparisons
This page is Spring Prompt, running in public
We just did this for every model. Do it for your prompt.
The rankings above come from running real tasks through real models and scoring every output. Spring Prompt is that same engine — pointed at your prompt, your test cases, and your definition of good.
- Generate test cases from your prompt — no eval set required to start.
- Compare models side by side with quality, cost and latency in one matrix.
- Optimise the winner until the scores say it's ready to ship.
Prompt × model results
12 test cases · 3 evals