Side-by-side comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs GLM 4.6V
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
Input / 1M
$15.0000
Output / 1M
$75.0000
| Claude Opus 4 | GLM 4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 200,000 | 131,072 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | vision, tools | vision, tools |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 15.0000 | 0.3000 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 75.0000 | 0.9000 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 or GLM 4.6V?
GLM 4.6V is cheaper than Claude Opus 4 on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $44.4 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4 or GLM 4.6V?
Claude Opus 4 has the larger context window at 200k tokens versus 131k tokens for GLM 4.6V. That means Claude Opus 4 can ingest about 1.5x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Claude Opus 4 and GLM 4.6V?
Claude Opus 4 comes from Anthropic; GLM 4.6V comes from Z.ai. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.