claude-opus-5-5
Checking current pricing…
Chat comparison
claude-opus-5-5vsglm-5.3
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
glm-5.3
Checking current pricing…
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Input formats
claude-opus-5-5
text, image, json
glm-5.3
text
Vision
claude-opus-5-5Better fit
Supported
glm-5.3
Not supported
Capability scores
AI-estimated ratings on 30 criteria from head-to-head comparisons against 86 other text models in the LLM7 catalog, judged by TypeSafe Jev from public information (2026-10-20). Each score is the win rate against the field, relative to the strongest model for that criterion (100%). Not a benchmark.
Below 50%50–79%80–94%95%+
claude-opus-5-5 · leads in 26
88%
Strong
glm-5.3 · leads in 3
58%
Moderate
Knowledge & reasoning
General knowledge
claude-opus-5-5Leads90%glm-5.353%Logical reasoning
claude-opus-5-5Leads92%glm-5.361%Mathematics
claude-opus-5-5Leads91%glm-5.366%Scientific and technical depth
claude-opus-5-5Leads95%glm-5.359%Planning and task decomposition
claude-opus-5-5Leads92%glm-5.361%
Coding & tools
Code generation
claude-opus-5-5Leads84%glm-5.350%Debugging and code review
claude-opus-5-5Leads93%glm-5.361%Agentic coding
claude-opus-5-5Leads95%glm-5.364%Tool and function calling
claude-opus-5-5Leads92%glm-5.357%SQL and query writing
claude-opus-5-5Leads92%glm-5.365%
Writing & language
Creative writing
claude-opus-5-5Leads91%glm-5.347%Professional writing
claude-opus-5-5Leads95%glm-5.354%Conversational quality
claude-opus-5-5Leads93%glm-5.351%Multilingual ability
claude-opus-5-580%glm-5.3Leads86%Translation
claude-opus-5-5Leads93%glm-5.364%Summarization
claude-opus-5-5Leads95%glm-5.360%
Data & professional work
Data analysis
claude-opus-5-5Leads96%glm-5.364%Professional domains
claude-opus-5-5Leads95%glm-5.356%Information extraction
claude-opus-5-5Leads96%glm-5.362%Classification and labeling
claude-opus-5-5Leads88%glm-5.363%Long-context handling
claude-opus-5-5Leads96%glm-5.375%
Reliability & control
Instruction following
claude-opus-5-5Leads93%glm-5.355%Structured output
claude-opus-5-5Leads100%glm-5.360%Factual accuracy
claude-opus-5-5Leads97%glm-5.353%Safety and alignment
claude-opus-5-5Leads94%glm-5.347%Steerability
claude-opus-5-5Leads95%glm-5.353%Output consistency
claude-opus-5-5Leads97%glm-5.360%
Speed, cost & vision
Response speed
claude-opus-5-513%glm-5.3Leads34%Cost efficiency
claude-opus-5-524%glm-5.3Leads36%Image understanding
claude-opus-5-587%glm-5.3No image input
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
claude-opus-5-5
98.83%
glm-5.3
98.84%
Average response time
claude-opus-5-5
12,553.5 ms
glm-5.3
20,395.48 ms
P95 API latency
claude-opus-5-5
60,000 ms
glm-5.3
60,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
claude-opus-5-5: 100%glm-5.3: 100%
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
claude-opus-5-5: 3,043 msglm-5.3: 5,597 ms
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
claude-opus-5-5: 5,000 msglm-5.3: 10,000 ms
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Checking current pricing…
Checking current pricing…
Quick take
- claude-opus-5-5 supports image input while the other model does not.
- The recent stability rates are too close to distinguish meaningfully.