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

GLM 5.1 vs DeepSeek V3.1

Detailed technical comparison between GLM 5.1 (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 5.1: 6 WinsvsDeepSeek V3.1: 0 Wins
Context Leader

GLM 5.1

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 5.1

GLM-5.1 delivers a major leap in coding capability, with particularly significant gains in handling long-horizon tasks. Unlike previous models built around minute-level interactions, GLM-5.1 can work independently and continuously on...

View GLM 5.1 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 5.1DeepSeek 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 Date2026-04-072025-08-21

API Pricing Comparison

Input Price per Million Tokens

GLM 5.1

$0.97

DeepSeek V3.1

$0.25

Output Price per Million Tokens

GLM 5.1

$3.04

DeepSeek V3.1

$0.95

💡 Cost Ratio: DeepSeek V3.1 is 3.9x cheaper per input token than GLM 5.1.

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
88.0%vs80.0%+8.0% GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 🏆
DeepSeek V3.1
HumanEvalPython coding & logic synthesis
89.5%vs78.2%+11.3% GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 🏆
DeepSeek V3.1
MATHComplex mathematical problem solving
77.0%vs55.4%+21.6% GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 🏆
DeepSeek V3.1
GPQAGraduate-level expert reasoning
51.0%vs40.8%+10.2% GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 🏆
DeepSeek V3.1
HellaSwagCommonsense reasoning and inference
88.5%vs83.0%+5.5% GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 🏆
DeepSeek V3.1
MT-BenchMulti-turn conversation flow quality
9.2%vs8.6%+0.6% GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 🏆
DeepSeek V3.1

GLM 5.1 Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

DeepSeek V3.1 Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

Explore Other Popular Comparisons

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 5.1 vs Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 5.1 vs GLM 4.7 Flash

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 5.1 vs GLM 5.2

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 5.1 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 5.1 vs GPT-5.2-Codex

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

SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW

GLM 5.1 vs Mistral Medium 3.1

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