Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) vs GLM-5.3 (Low)

Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GLM-5.3 (Low) by Z AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.

Clear winner

AnthropicClaude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback)Off the frontier

Intelligence: 42.30
Total cost: $860

Z AIGLM-5.3 (Low)Off the frontier

Intelligence: 34.30
Total cost: $1013

Verdict

Pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback)

GLM-5.3 (Low) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback): 18.9% less intelligence, 17.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 132.6% slower end-to-end.

Metric	Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback)	GLM-5.3 (Low)	Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)	42.3	34.3	−18.9% GLM-5.3 (Low) is 18.9% less intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)	$860.33	$1,012.50	+17.7% GLM-5.3 (Low) is 17.7% more expensive
End-to-end time (lower is better)	13.42s	31.21s	+132.6% GLM-5.3 (Low) is 132.6% slower
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)	$4.00 / $20.0	$1.40 / $4.40
Input modalities	Text, Image	Text

Open this matchup in the interactive picker Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback): what beats it GLM-5.3 (Low): what beats it

Today's Pareto frontier

Against the frontier

Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
GLM-5.3 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.

Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback)GLM-5.3 (Low)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model

Matchup

Compare something else

Agents: Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-low/glm-5-3-low · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-low/glm-5-3-low?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill