Claude Sonnet 4.6vsGLM-5
Claude Sonnet 4.6 | GLM-5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 744B |
| 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. | 91%Best | 28% |
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. | 79.6%Best | 77.8% |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 73.3% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | 49% | — |
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. | 30% | — |
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. | 58% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 56.2% |
Multi-step tool use MCP AtlasCan the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | 69.5% | — |
Browser agent BU BenchCan the AI drive a real web browser to finish tasks — clicking, filling forms, and navigating sites the way a person would? Run by Browser Use on their BU Bench task set. Higher is better. | 62% | — |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | — | 75.9% |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 33.2% | — |
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. | — | 50.4% |
Abstract reasoning ARC-AGI-2Puzzle-style tests of abstract reasoning and pattern-finding — the kind of thing people find easy but AIs often struggle with. Higher is better. | 58.3% | — |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 89.9%Best | 86% |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 72.5% | — |
Agentic financial analysis Finance Agent v2Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | 51% | — |
Knowledge work GDPval-AAMeasures how well the AI does economically valuable knowledge work, judged against human experts. Shown as a rating (like a chess Elo) — higher is better. | 1676 | — |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 72.4% | — |
Multimodal reasoning MMMU-ProA tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | 74.5% | — |
Spatial reasoning Blueprint-Bench 2Can the AI reason about space and layout — for example, understanding a floor plan or blueprint? Higher is better. | 6.7% | — |
Long context MRCR v2 (8-needle) · 128k averageTests whether the AI can find specific details buried inside a very long document (around 128k tokens — roughly a long book). Higher is better. | 84.9% | — |
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. | 1472 | — |
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. | 1521Best | 1435 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | Z.ai |
| Release date | Feb 17 2026 | Feb 12 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
Which is better: Claude Sonnet 4.6 or GLM-5?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads GLM-5 on 4 of the 4 benchmarks they both report (BullshitBench v2, SWE-Bench Verified, GPQA Diamond, Arena Elo (Code)). GLM-5 shipped 5 days before Claude Sonnet 4.6, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is proprietary, while GLM-5 is open weight.
On BullshitBench v2, Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads at 91% vs GLM-5 at 28%. On SWE-Bench Verified, Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads at 79.6% vs GLM-5 at 77.8%. On GPQA Diamond, Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads at 89.9% vs GLM-5 at 86%. On Arena Elo (Code), Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads at 1521 vs GLM-5 at 1435.
Frequently asked questions
Claude Sonnet 4.6 was released by Anthropic on Feb 17 2026.
GLM-5 was released by Z.ai on Feb 12 2026.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads on SWE-Bench Verified — Claude Sonnet 4.6 79.6% vs GLM-5 77.8%.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads on GPQA Diamond — Claude Sonnet 4.6 89.9% vs GLM-5 86%.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is a proprietary model released by Anthropic. GLM-5 is an open weight model released by Z.ai.
Other comparisons
Claude Sonnet 4.6vsGPT-5.6-CyberGLM-5vsGPT-5.6-CyberClaude Sonnet 4.6vsGemini 3.7 FlashGLM-5vsGemini 3.7 FlashClaude Sonnet 4.6vsMuse GlimmerGLM-5vsMuse GlimmerClaude Sonnet 4.6vsGrok 4.6GLM-5vsGrok 4.6Claude Sonnet 4.6vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813GLM-5vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Claude Sonnet 4.6vsMistral Medium 3.5GLM-5vsMistral Medium 3.5