Claude Opus 4.6vsGLM-5.3
Claude Opus 4.6 | GLM-5.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 743B |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 87% | — |
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 80.8% | — |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.1Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 66.9% |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 75% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 3.0command-line task completion (v3.0, much harder task set) | — | 28.3% |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 83.7% | — |
Cybersecurity CyberGymTests the AI on cybersecurity challenges — finding and exploiting software weaknesses inside a safe sandbox. Higher is better. | — | 84.5% |
Cybersecurity ExploitBenchA 'capability ladder' for security research, built by CMU researchers: the AI is given known bugs in Chrome's V8 engine and scored on how far it gets toward a working exploit inside a research sandbox — from understanding the patch to triggering a crash. Higher is better. | — | 54.4% |
Cybersecurity ExploitGym · 6-hour budgetCan an AI agent turn a known software vulnerability into a working attack in a controlled lab? Built by MPI-SP researchers, the score is how many of 898 real cases (userspace programs, the V8 engine, the Linux kernel) it cracks — here with a 6-hour compute budget per case. Higher is better. | — | 130 |
Cybersecurity ExploitGym · 2-hour budgetCan an AI agent turn a known software vulnerability into a working attack in a controlled lab? Built by MPI-SP researchers, the score is how many of 898 real cases (userspace programs, the V8 engine, the Linux kernel) it cracks — here with a 2-hour compute budget per case. Higher is better. | — | 105 |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 53% | 62.5%Best |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 91.3% | — |
Agentic computer use Agent's Last ExamA hard set of desktop and operating-system tasks an AI agent has to finish by looking at the screen and working the machine itself. The score is the share it passes outright — partial credit does not count. Higher is better. | — | 28.5% |
Business workflows AutomationBenchTests whether the AI can run real multi-step business workflows — the kind of end-to-end office processes companies want to automate — from start to finish. Higher is better. | — | 48.2% |
Knowledge work GDPval-AA v2economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | — | 1769 |
Community preference Arena Elo (Text)Real people chat with two anonymous AIs side by side and vote for the answer they prefer. Votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai — it measures which AI people actually like, not test scores. Higher is better. | 1504 | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1543 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | Z.ai |
| Release date | Feb 5 2026 | Aug 14 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: Claude Opus 4.6 or GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.3 leads Claude Opus 4.6 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Humanity's Last Exam). Claude Opus 4.6 shipped 190 days before GLM-5.3, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On Humanity's Last Exam · with tools, GLM-5.3 leads at 62.5% vs Claude Opus 4.6 at 53%.
Frequently asked questions
Claude Opus 4.6 was released by Anthropic on Feb 5 2026.
GLM-5.3 was released by Z.ai on Aug 14 2026.
GLM-5.3 leads on Humanity's Last Exam · with tools — Claude Opus 4.6 53% vs GLM-5.3 62.5%.
Other comparisons
Claude Opus 4.6vsGPT-5.6-CyberGLM-5.3vsGPT-5.6-CyberClaude Opus 4.6vsGemini 3.7 FlashGLM-5.3vsGemini 3.7 FlashClaude Opus 4.6vsMuse GlimmerGLM-5.3vsMuse GlimmerClaude Opus 4.6vsGrok 4.6GLM-5.3vsGrok 4.6Claude Opus 4.6vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813GLM-5.3vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Claude Opus 4.6vsMistral Medium 3.5GLM-5.3vsMistral Medium 3.5