← Back to Model Hub/SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW
SHARE THIS:

GLM 4.6 vs DeepSeek V3.1

Detailed technical comparison between GLM 4.6 (Zhipu AI) and DeepSeek V3.1 (DeepSeek). Review live API token pricing, context window capabilities, time-to-first-token latency, and verified benchmark scores side-by-side.

⚡ Executive Summary & Verdict

Comparison Snapshot

GLM 4.6: 0 WinsvsDeepSeek V3.1: 6 Wins
Context Leader

GLM 4.6

204,800 tokens
Agentic Tool-Calling

Tie

Equal Capability
Lowest Latency (TTFT)

Tie

Equal Speed
Input Price Leader

DeepSeek V3.1

$0.25 / MTok
Zhipu AIactive

GLM 4.6

Compared with GLM-4.5, this generation brings several key improvements: Longer context window: The context window has been expanded from 128K to 200K tokens, enabling the model to handle more complex...

View GLM 4.6 Full Specs →
DeepSeekactive

DeepSeek V3.1

DeepSeek-V3.1 is a large hybrid reasoning model (671B parameters, 37B active) that supports both thinking and non-thinking modes via prompt templates. It extends the DeepSeek-V3 base with a two-phase long-context...

View DeepSeek V3.1 Full Specs →

Technical Specifications

🏆 = Superior Spec
SpecificationGLM 4.6DeepSeek V3.1
ProviderZhipu AIDeepSeek
Context Window204,800 tokens🏆163,840 tokens
Agent SuitabilityN/AN/A
Time to First Token (TTFT)N/AN/A
Deployment Modelmanaged apiself hostable
Production Stabilitystablestable
API AvailableYesYes
Released Date2025-09-302025-08-21

API Pricing Comparison

Input Price per Million Tokens

GLM 4.6

$0.50

DeepSeek V3.1

$0.25

Output Price per Million Tokens

GLM 4.6

$2.00

DeepSeek V3.1

$0.95

💡 Cost Ratio: DeepSeek V3.1 is 2.0x cheaper per input token than GLM 4.6.

Want to test both models live?

Run side-by-side prompt benchmarks in our dynamic multi-model Sandbox. Compare execution speeds, latency metrics, and compute actual costs in real-time.

Open Live Sandbox Playground →

Benchmark Performance Metrics

Standardized Scores (0–100%)

Scores show verified raw accuracy percentages across standardized AI evaluation suites. Higher bars indicate superior performance in that domain.

MMLUGeneral knowledge & multi-task understanding
79.8%vs80.0%+0.2% DeepSeek V3.1
GLM 4.6
DeepSeek V3.1 🏆
HumanEvalPython coding & logic synthesis
78.0%vs78.2%+0.2% DeepSeek V3.1
GLM 4.6
DeepSeek V3.1 🏆
MATHComplex mathematical problem solving
55.2%vs55.4%+0.2% DeepSeek V3.1
GLM 4.6
DeepSeek V3.1 🏆
GPQAGraduate-level expert reasoning
40.6%vs40.8%+0.2% DeepSeek V3.1
GLM 4.6
DeepSeek V3.1 🏆
HellaSwagCommonsense reasoning and inference
82.8%vs83.0%+0.2% DeepSeek V3.1
GLM 4.6
DeepSeek V3.1 🏆
MT-BenchMulti-turn conversation flow quality
8.5%vs8.6%+0.0% DeepSeek V3.1
GLM 4.6
DeepSeek V3.1 🏆

GLM 4.6 Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

DeepSeek V3.1 Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

Explore Other Popular Comparisons

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 4.6 vs Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 4.6 vs GLM 4.7 Flash

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 4.6 vs GLM 5.2

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 4.6 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 4.6 vs GPT-5.2-Codex

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 4.6 vs Mistral Medium 3.1

Compare context windows, live API token prices, and benchmark scores.