Compare / head-to-head
Claude Opus 4.6vsGLM-4.7
Claude Opus 4.6 leads 4 of 4 shared benchmarks. GLM-4.7 is 10.7x cheaper per token. Claude Opus 4.6 has the larger context window (1M tokens).
Benchmarks from cited public sources; pricing from official pages; status from official provider feeds.
Shared benchmarks
4 – 0
Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Cheaper per token
GLM-4.7
10.7x cheaper, input + output
Larger context
Claude Opus 4.6
1M tokens
Provider uptime (30d)
100% · —
Anthropic · Z.ai
Claude Opus 4.6
Anthropic · released 2026-02-05
textvision
Quality
Benchmark matrix
4 shared · 14 only Claude Opus 4.6 · 0 only GLM-4.7| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GLM-4.7 | Δ | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reported by both · 4 | ||||
| GPQA Diamond | 91.3% ↗ | 83.3% ↗epoch | +8 pt | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| LMArena Elo | 1497.5 ↗ | 1435.9 ↗ | +61.6 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 (Epoch AI run) | 94.4% ↗epoch | 83.3% ↗epoch | +11.1 pt | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 47% ↗epoch | 32.2% ↗epoch | +14.8 pt | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Only Claude Opus 4.6 reports · 14 | ||||
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| AIME 2026 | 96.7% ↗matharena | not reported | — | — |
| ARC-AGI-2 (Verified) | 68.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 v2 (Epoch AI run) | 26.8% ↗epoch | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (Epoch AI run) | 66% ↗epoch | not reported | — | — |
| MCP Atlas | 59.5% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| MMMLU | 91.1% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| MMMU-Pro (no tools) | 73.9% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| MMMU-Pro (with tools) | 77.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| OSWorld-Verified | 72.7% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch AI run) | 78.7% ↗epoch | not reported | — | — |
| Tau2-bench Retail | 91.9% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Tau2-bench Telecom | 99.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 65.4% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Only GLM-4.7 reports · 0 | ||||
| GLM-4.7 reports nothing Claude Opus 4.6 does not. | ||||
Scores tagged "epoch" or "matharena" are independent runs, used only where the lab has not published its own; ⚠ marks rows MathArena flags as released after the competition. Higher is better on every row. Δ is Claude Opus 4.6 minus GLM-4.7 in the benchmark's own unit. "Not reported" means the lab has not published that figure; it is not a zero. ↗ opens the source.
Specs & pricing
Side by side
Official pricing pages and model cards| Spec | Claude Opus 4.6 | GLM-4.7 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Context window | 1M tokens | 200K tokens | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Max output | 128K tokens | 131K tokens | GLM-4.7 |
| Input price / 1M | $5 ↗ | $0.6 ↗ | GLM-4.7 |
| Output price / 1M | $25 ↗ | $2.2 ↗ | GLM-4.7 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.5 ↗ | $0.11 ↗ | GLM-4.7 |
| Input + output / 1M Lower is cheaper. List prices; batch, tool and regional fees excluded. | $30 | $2.8 | GLM-4.7 |
| Modalities | text · vision | text | Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Released | 2026-02-05 | 2025-12-22 | — |
| Cited benchmark scores | 19 | 4 | — |
Reliability
Provider status
Last 60 days · refreshed daily on this page · live on /statusMore matchups
Claude Opus 4.6 vs …
Models sharing the most benchmarksMore matchups
GLM-4.7 vs …
Models sharing the most benchmarksBuilt by Respan
Which one wins on your data?
Public benchmarks are a starting point. Run Claude Opus 4.6 and GLM-4.7 on your own prompts with Respan evals, or route to either through one gateway key with automatic failover.