Compare/GLM-5.1 vs Mistral Medium 3.5

AI tool comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Mistral Medium 3.5

Which one should you ship with? Here is the side-by-side panel verdict, pricing read, reviewer split, and community vote comparison.

G

AI Models

GLM-5.1

First open-source model to top SWE-bench Pro — 744B MoE, MIT, zero Nvidia

Mixed

50%

Panel ship

Community

Paid

Entry

GLM-5.1 is Z.ai's (formerly Zhipu AI) open-weight model released April 7, 2026 under the MIT license. It's a 744-billion-parameter Mixture-of-Experts architecture with 40 billion active parameters per token, a 200K-token context window, and a 131K maximum output length — and it became the first open-source model ever to lead SWE-bench Pro, scoring 58.4% versus Claude Opus 4.6's 57.3%. The training story is almost as remarkable as the performance. GLM-5.1 was trained entirely on approximately 100,000 Huawei Ascend 910B chips using the MindSpore framework — no Nvidia hardware was used at any point. That makes it one of the first frontier-tier models to demonstrate that the CUDA monoculture isn't technically mandatory for training state-of-the-art models. Z.ai became the first publicly traded foundation model company via a Hong Kong IPO in January 2026 (~$558M raised). The model is free to download from HuggingFace and also available via API at $0.95 per million input tokens. In agentic demonstrations, it has run autonomously for eight hours straight — 655 planning and execution iterations — without human checkpoints.

M

AI Models

Mistral Medium 3.5

128B open-weight model with async remote coding agents and 256k context

Ship

75%

Panel ship

Community

Paid

Entry

Mistral Medium 3.5 is a 128B dense model with a 256k context window, scoring 77.6% on SWE-Bench Verified and 91.4 on τ³-Telecom. It's released with open weights under a modified MIT license — one of the strongest coding-capable open-weight releases this year. Priced at $1.50/M input and $7.50/M output via API, it's positioned as a cost-competitive alternative to proprietary frontier models for agentic and software engineering tasks. Alongside the model, Mistral is launching Vibe — a remote coding agent system that runs sessions in the cloud. Developers can start a task from the CLI or Le Chat, "teleport" their local session to the cloud (preserving history and approval state), and let it run asynchronously while they work on something else. Sessions run in isolated sandboxes and can automatically open pull requests on GitHub when complete. This competes directly with Devin, GitHub Copilot Workspace, and similar async coding agents. The Le Chat Work Mode adds a general-purpose agentic layer on top: multi-step workflows across email, calendar, and messaging, research synthesis from internal and external sources, and inbox triage with drafted replies. All actions are transparent and require explicit approval before anything sensitive executes. The combination of open weights, competitive pricing, and production-ready remote agents makes this one of Mistral's most significant releases since Mixtral.

Decision
GLM-5.1
Mistral Medium 3.5
Panel verdict
Mixed · 2 ship / 2 skip
Ship · 3 ship / 1 skip
Community
No community votes yet
No community votes yet
Pricing
Open Source (MIT) / API $0.95/M input tokens
$1.50/M input · $7.50/M output
Best for
First open-source model to top SWE-bench Pro — 744B MoE, MIT, zero Nvidia
128B open-weight model with async remote coding agents and 256k context
Category
AI Models
AI Models

Reviewer scorecard

Builder
80/100 · ship

MIT license, top SWE-bench Pro score, $0.95/M via API. If your use case is agentic coding and you're not evaluating GLM-5.1, you're leaving real performance on the table. The 8-hour autonomous run capability is compelling for long-horizon task pipelines.

80/100 · ship

Open weights at 77.6% SWE-Bench with cloud-native async agents is a compelling combo. The 'teleport local session to cloud' UX for Vibe is genuinely clever — it solves the context-loss problem when shifting from local to remote execution.

Skeptic
45/100 · skip

SWE-bench Pro is one benchmark. The broader coding composite (Terminal-Bench 2.0 + NL2Repo) still has Claude Opus 4.6 ahead at 57.5 vs GLM-5.1's 54.9. Running 744B locally requires hardware most teams don't own, and the API's Chinese jurisdiction will trigger compliance blockers for many organizations.

45/100 · skip

77.6% on SWE-Bench is strong but still behind Claude Sonnet and GPT-5.5 on the same benchmark. The Vibe agent is in 'public preview' which typically means rough edges. Wait for v1.0 before betting a production workflow on it.

Futurist
80/100 · ship

The Huawei chip training story matters more than the benchmark ranking. If GLM-5.1 proves you can train frontier models without Nvidia at scale, it fractures the GPU supply chain narrative that's been shaping geopolitics and AI policy discussions for years. This is a proof of concept with enormous implications.

80/100 · ship

Open-weight models with integrated remote agent infrastructure is the architecture that democratizes agentic AI. Any developer can self-host the weights and build their own agent backend — no vendor lock-in required.

Creator
45/100 · skip

For creative workflows, the 744B MoE overhead is overkill and local deployment requires datacenter-grade hardware that's nowhere near indie studio territory. The MIT license is great, but the gap between 'free to download' and 'free to actually run' is vast at this parameter count.

80/100 · ship

The Le Chat Work Mode covering email, calendar, and research synthesis is exactly what knowledge workers need. Mistral's approval-first approach to sensitive actions is the right balance between automation and human oversight.

Weekly AI Tool Verdicts

Get the next comparison in your inbox

New AI tools ship daily. We compare them before you waste an afternoon.

Bookmarks

Loading bookmarks...

No bookmarks yet

Bookmark tools to save them for later