Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GLM 5
Anthropic · US | Z.ai · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 for terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3% or same $2/$10 per million token pricing as sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/mtok as of october 7, 2026. Pick GLM 5 for agentic planning and long-horizon coding workflows or complex systems design and backend reasoning. Choose GLM 5 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Claude Sonnet 5.5 if you want a managed API.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Anthropic, US) and GLM 5 (Z.ai, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%). GLM 5 is z.ai's flagship open-weight (MIT) MoE foundation model, engineered for complex systems design and long-horizon agentic coding. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: GLM 5 is about 2× cheaper on input ($1/$3.2 per 1M tokens vs $2/$10 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
- ▸Context window: Claude Sonnet 5.5 holds 5× more — 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) vs 200K (~300 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
- ▸Recency: Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the newer model by about 8 months (released September 28, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
- ▸Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-China matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GLM 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic (US) | Z.ai (China) |
| Released | September 28, 2026 | February 12, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) | 200K (~300 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $2/$10 per 1M tokens | $1/$3.2 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | Yes — self-hostable |
| Modalities | text, image, code | text, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | 77.8% |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | Not published |
Who wins what
Terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from Claude Sonnet 5's 10.3%
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%) — and it carries the larger 1M tokens context.
Same $2/$10 per million token pricing as Sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/MTok as of October 7, 2026
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Its 1M tokens window holds about 5× more than GLM 5's 200K in a single prompt.
Scores close to Opus 5.5 on several benchmarks (e.g. GDPval-AA v2.1 knowledge-work Elo) at a fraction of the cost
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%) — and it is the newer of the two.
Agentic planning and long-horizon coding workflows
GLM 5
Z.ai's flagship open-weight (MIT) MoE foundation model, engineered for complex systems design and long-horizon agentic coding — and it runs cheaper at $1/$3.2 per 1M tokens.
Complex systems design and backend reasoning
GLM 5
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is comparatively weak here — anthropic is explicit that Opus 5.5 'remains clearly stronger' on complex, open-ended work requiring sustained judgment
Iterative self-correction on autonomous tasks
GLM 5
Z.ai's flagship open-weight (MIT) MoE foundation model, engineered for complex systems design and long-horizon agentic coding — and its weights are open while Claude Sonnet 5.5 is API-only.
Lowest cost at scale
GLM 5
At $1/$3.2 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Its 1M tokens window is about 5× larger than GLM 5's 200K, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ GLM 5
At $1/$3.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Sonnet 5.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Claude Sonnet 5.5
Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ GLM 5
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Claude Sonnet 5.5 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3%
→ Claude Sonnet 5.5
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is agentic planning and long-horizon coding workflows
→ GLM 5
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GLM 5
Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%). Released September 28, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from Claude Sonnet 5's 10.3%, same $2/$10 per million token pricing as Sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/MTok as of October 7, 2026, scores close to Opus 5.5 on several benchmarks (e.g. GDPval-AA v2.1 knowledge-work Elo) at a fraction of the cost, and anthropic highlights stronger document/slide generation, spreadsheet work, and visual chart recognition (Chartography: 61.6%).
Its trade-offs are real: anthropic is explicit that Opus 5.5 'remains clearly stronger' on complex, open-ended work requiring sustained judgment, 1M-token context isn't uniformly available across every platform/plan, consistent with the rest of the 5.5 family, and mid-tier update released a week after Opus 5.5 (Sept 22) — Haiku 5.5 followed Oct 7 to complete the family. At $2 in / $10 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
GLM 5: where it fits
Z.ai's flagship open-weight (MIT) MoE foundation model, engineered for complex systems design and long-horizon agentic coding. Released February 12, 2026 by Z.ai, it is built for agentic planning and long-horizon coding workflows, complex systems design and backend reasoning, iterative self-correction on autonomous tasks, and open weights under the permissive MIT license.
Its trade-offs: 200K context trails 1M-context rivals, and quickly superseded by GLM-5.1 and GLM-5.2. At $1 in / $3.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. GLM 5 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Claude Sonnet 5.5 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GLM 5 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Claude Sonnet 5.5, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leans toward terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3% while GLM 5 leans toward agentic planning and long-horizon coding workflows, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GLM 5?
GLM 5 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Claude Sonnet 5.5 is API-metered at $2/$10 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 — 1M tokens vs 200K, about 5× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GLM 5 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Sonnet 5.5, GLM 5 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GLM 5?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 — released September 28, 2026, about 8 months after GLM 5.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.