Skip to main content
Van Data Team

text model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM-5.3

Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3 are both current text models, from Anthropic and Z.ai. GLM-5.3 is 65% cheaper per 1M input tokens than Claude Opus 5.5, $1.40 vs $4. On Arena Text, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 1509 Elo and GLM-5.3 1481 Elo (Arena, measured October 28, 2026). Both accept 1,000,000 tokens of context.

Higher Arena Text
Claude Opus 5.51509 Elo against 1481 Elo
Lower price per 1M input tokens
GLM-5.3$1.40 against $4
Newer release
Claude Opus 5.5Sep 2026 against Aug 2026

Data verified November 3, 2026 · Dataset 2026-11-03

Share this

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3, line by line

Prices in effect today, compared at the same tier wherever both list one. The better value in each row is highlighted.

FactClaude Opus 5.5GLM-5.3
Price
Price per 1M input tokens$4$1.40 (better)
Price per 1M output tokens$20$4.40 (better)
Independent benchmarks
Arena Text1509 Elo (#2 of 51) (better)1481 Elo (#16 of 51)
Arena WebDev1810 Elo (#1 of 45) (better)1623 Elo (#21 of 45)
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)91.2% (#3 of 42) (better)68.8% (#25 of 42)
GPQA Diamond90.6% (#25 of 41)90.9% (#23 of 41) (better)
SimpleQA Verified72.2% (#5 of 38) (better)41% (#29 of 38)
Specs
ProviderAnthropicZ.ai
Release dateSeptember 22, 2026August 18, 2026
AccessAPI onlyAPI and open weights
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output128,000 tokens128,000 tokens
Inputtext, imagetext
Outputtexttext

Scores:Arena · 2026-11-03Epoch AI · 2026-11-03

Open both in the interactive comparison

Charts

Against every current text model

Where Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3 land among the current models of their task, on every independent benchmark, on price and on context.

Where each stands

On Arena Text, Claude Opus 5.5 ranks #2 and GLM-5.3 #16 of 51 current models. Each bar is the share of current models it beats: on score, price and context.

Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3 among the current text models, one row per benchmark, price and context window.

Independent benchmarks

Arena Text

Claude Opus 5.5:#2of 51

1,509 Elo · ahead of 98%

GLM-5.3:#16of 51

1,481 Elo · ahead of 68%

Arena WebDev

Claude Opus 5.5:#1of 45

1,810 Elo · ahead of 100%

GLM-5.3:#21of 45

1,623 Elo · ahead of 55%

FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)

Claude Opus 5.5:#3of 42

91.2% · ahead of 95%

GLM-5.3:#25of 42

68.8% · ahead of 41%

GPQA Diamond

Claude Opus 5.5:#25of 41

90.6% · ahead of 40%

GLM-5.3:#23of 41

90.9% · ahead of 45%

SimpleQA Verified

Claude Opus 5.5:#5of 38

72.2% · ahead of 89%

GLM-5.3:#29of 38

41% · ahead of 22%

Price and context

Price per 1M input tokens

Claude Opus 5.5:#43of 52

$4 · cheaper than 14%

GLM-5.3:#27of 52

$1.40 · cheaper than 49%

Price per 1M output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5:#43of 52

$20 · cheaper than 14%

GLM-5.3:#26of 52

$4.40 · cheaper than 51%

Context window

Claude Opus 5.5:#26of 64

1M tokens · longer than 22%

GLM-5.3:#26of 64

1M tokens · longer than 22%

Scores fromArena · 2026-11-03Epoch AI · 2026-11-03

Quality against price

Arena Text · measured October 28, 2026

Claude Opus 5.5 scores 1,509 at $8; GLM-5.3 scores 1,481 at $2.15 (blended price per 1M tokens). The line joins the current models no other beats on both price and Arena Text score; hover any point to name it.

Quality against priceArena Text score against price for 43 text models, Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3 marked.1,2501,3001,3501,4001,4501,5001,550$0.30$1$3$10MOST ATTRACTIVE QUADRANTMedian price $3Median 1,475Blended price per 1M tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scaleArena Text (Elo)Claude Opus 5.5GLM-5.3
Quality against price: the data
Arena Text score against price for 43 text models, Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3 marked.
ModelProviderBlended price per 1M tokensArena Text (Elo)
Gemini 4 ArgonGoogle$41,520
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic$81,509
Muse WonderMeta$81,507
Claude Fable 5Anthropic$201,504
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic$201,504
Gemini 3.8 FlashGoogle$1.501,496
Muse Spark 1.3Meta$21,495
Claude Opus 5Anthropic$101,492
Kimi K3Moonshot Kimi$61,488
GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI$81,485
Gemini 3.6 FlashGoogle$31,483
GPT-5.5OpenAI$111,482
Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic$101,482
Qwen3.8-MaxAlibaba Qwen$31,482
GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI$41,481
GLM-5.3Z.ai$2.151,481
MiMo-V2.6-ProXiaomi MiMo$0.541,480
Claude Sonnet 5.5Anthropic$41,477
GLM-5.3-FlashZ.ai$0.241,477
GPT-6 AstraOpenAI$201,476
DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek$0.521,476
GPT-5.4OpenAI$5.631,475
Gemini 3 Flash PreviewGoogle$1.131,473
Grok 4.20xAI$1.561,472
GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI$4.501,467
Grok 4.5xAI$31,465
DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek$1.981,465
Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic$41,462
GPT-6 SolOpenAI$41,458
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle$0.851,456
Grok 4.6xAI$31,455
GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI$0.451,453
MiMo-V2.6-FlashXiaomi MiMo$0.181,448
Step 5 PreviewStepFun$1.431,448
Grok 4.3xAI$1.561,442
GPT-6 LunaOpenAI$0.201,441
Grok 4.7xAI$31,441
Mistral Large 4Mistral AI$1.051,432
Claude Haiku 5.5Anthropic$0.201,425
GPT-4.1OpenAI$3.501,415
Solar Pro 4Upstage$0.521,388
GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI$0.701,383
GPT-4.1 nanoOpenAI$0.181,322

Cost

What each costs

Example workloads at each provider's listed rates, then every other rate either one lists. The cheaper figure in each row is highlighted.

The same work, priced

For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5.5 costs 3.5 times as much as GLM-5.3, at each provider's listed rates.

What Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3 cost for the same work, at the rates each provider lists.

  • 10M input and 2M output tokens

    Claude Opus 5.5 costs 3.5× as much

    Claude Opus 5.5
    $80
    GLM-5.3
    $22.80

  • The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached

    Claude Opus 5.5 costs 3.7× as much

    Claude Opus 5.5
    $45.80
    GLM-5.3
    $12.54
Workload or rateClaude Opus 5.5GLM-5.3
Example workloads
10M input and 2M output tokens$80$22.80 (better)
The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached$45.80$12.54 (better)
The same, through the batch API$40Not listed
Other listed rates
1M input tokens, cached$0.20 (better)$0.26
1M input tokens, 5-minute cache write$5Not listed
1M input tokens, 1-hour cache write$8Not listed
1M input tokens, batch$2Not listed
1M output tokens, batch$10Not listed

Your own bill will differ. These figures use list prices and example workloads. The AI Model Cost Audit reviews your real usage, shortlists models that score as well for each task for less, and estimates the savings.

Launch price $100, regular price $150

Book the cost audit

Verdict

When to choose each

Claude Opus 5.5

Where it leads

  • Higher Arena Text score, 1509 Elo vs 1481 Elo
  • Higher Arena WebDev score, 1810 Elo vs 1623 Elo
  • Higher FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) score, 91.2% vs 68.8%
  • Higher SimpleQA Verified score, 72.2% vs 41%
  • Accepts image input
  • Cheaper cached input, $0.20 vs $0.26 per 1M tokens
  • Batch pricing, $2 input and $10 output per 1M tokens

Best for

  • Long-running agentic coding and knowledge work as the general-purpose default
  • Cache-heavy agent loops where the 0.05x read multiplier compounds

Watch out for

  • The API effort default is medium here, not high as on Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Sonnet 5.5, so a like-for-like comparison has to set effort explicitly
  • The 4.7-generation tokenizer produces roughly 30% more tokens for the same text than Claude Sonnet 4.6 and earlier, so per-token rates do not compare directly across generations
Full Claude Opus 5.5 profile

GLM-5.3

Where it leads

  • Lower input and output prices, $1.40 and $4.40 vs $4 and $20 per 1M tokens
  • Higher GPQA Diamond score, 90.9% vs 90.6%
  • Open weights you can run yourself

Best for

  • Long-horizon agentic coding
  • Self-hosted reasoning with permissive weights

Watch out for

  • Text input only, and reasoning cannot be turned off: requests that disable thinking fail
  • The licence requires a Z.ai security review before very large model-as-a-service operators use it commercially
Full GLM-5.3 profile

From benchmark to production

Building on Claude Opus 5.5 or GLM-5.3?

Public scores rarely hold on your own data. We test both models on your real tasks, then build the agent or pipeline around the one that wins.

AI Model Cost AuditLaunch price $100, regular price $150What the audit includes

Book the cost auditAI agent development

FAQ

Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM-5.3 FAQ

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or GLM-5.3?

GLM-5.3 is 65% cheaper per 1M input tokens than Claude Opus 5.5, $1.40 vs $4. For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5.5 costs $80 and GLM-5.3 $22.80 at standard rates.

Which is cheaper with prompt caching, Claude Opus 5.5 or GLM-5.3?

Claude Opus 5.5 charges $0.20 per 1M cached input tokens, 95% below its standard input rate, and GLM-5.3 $0.26, 81% below. With 9M of 10M input tokens cached and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5.5 costs $45.80 and GLM-5.3 $12.54.

Which scores higher on independent benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 or GLM-5.3?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads on Arena Text, 1509 Elo to 1481 Elo; Claude Opus 5.5 leads on Arena WebDev, 1810 Elo to 1623 Elo; Claude Opus 5.5 leads on FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2), 91.2% to 68.8%. Scores are independent evaluations, not either vendor's launch figures.

Which has the larger context window, Claude Opus 5.5 or GLM-5.3?

Both accept 1,000,000 tokens of context. Both return up to 128,000 tokens per response.

How do Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3 differ in features?

Claude Opus 5.5 takes text and image input; GLM-5.3 takes text.

Can I run Claude Opus 5.5 or GLM-5.3 myself?

GLM-5.3 is released as open weights you can run yourself; Claude Opus 5.5 is available through its provider's API only.

Further reading

More on Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3

Articles on Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3

Related comparisons

Production evaluation

Choosing between Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM-5.3?

Public benchmarks narrow the shortlist. We run both on your own tasks, data and cost limits, then build the routing and review controls to run the winner in production.

  • A head-to-head evaluation on your real workload
  • Routing between models by cost and difficulty
Compare all modelsBook a consultation