Model Comparison
GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning)
vs. GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Z AI
Recommended Pick
Z GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) 18 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
26.0 reasoning / $0.45/1M
Lowest Price
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning)
$0.30/1M input price
Best Reasoning
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning)
26.0 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning)
11.1 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) is 2.0x cheaper on input tokens than GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) generates about 2.5x as many tokens per second as GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) leads GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) by 5.2 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) leads GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) by 0.3 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning)
Z AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning)
Z AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Z GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Z GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.60/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.80/1M | $0.90/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.90/1M | $0.45/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Z AI | Z AI |
| Release Date | Aug 11, 2025 | Dec 8, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 31.7 tok/s | 80.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | 33307ms | 1147ms |
| Latency | 33307ms | 1147ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 40.1 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 20.8 | 26.0 |
| Intelligence | 12.7 | 17.1 |
| Coding | 10.8 | 11.1 |
| Math | 15.3 | 26.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 57.3% | 56.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 75.1% | 75.2% |
| HLE | 3.6% | 3.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | 35.2% | 41.1% |
| AIME 2025 | 15.3% | 26.3% |
| SciCode | 18.8% | 27.2% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 12.3% |
| IFBench | 28.6% | 27.9% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 19.6% | 30.7% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 6.8% | 3.0% |
Key Takeaways
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.30/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 26.0 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning) reaches a 11.1 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning)
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
GLM-4.6V (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
