Claude Opus 5 (High) vs GLM-5.3 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (High) by Anthropic or GLM-5.3 (Max) by Z AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (High) scores 3.3 points higher (48.1 vs 44.8) but costs 1.7× as much to run the benchmark ($4332 vs $2503; both flagship class). Pick Claude Opus 5 (High) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GLM-5.3 (Max).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (High) | GLM-5.3 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 48.1 | 44.8 | −6.9% GLM-5.3 (Max) is 6.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,331.68 | $2,503.48 | −42.2% GLM-5.3 (Max) is 42.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 23.65s | 28.79s | +21.7% GLM-5.3 (Max) is 21.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $1.40 / $4.40 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
GLM-5.3 (Max) vs Claude Opus 5 (High): 6.9% less intelligence, 42.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 21.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- GLM-5.3 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Claude Opus 5 (High)GLM-5.3 (Max)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-high/glm-5-3 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-high/glm-5-3?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill