Compare/GLM-5.1 vs Meta Llama 4

AI tool comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Meta Llama 4

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

#1 on SWE-Bench Pro — 744B MoE model that runs autonomously for 8 hours

Mixed

50%

Panel ship

Community

Paid

Entry

GLM-5.1 is Z.AI's post-training upgrade of the 744B Mixture-of-Experts GLM-5 model, and it has just claimed the top spot on SWE-Bench Pro with a score of 58.4 — beating GPT-5.4 (57.7), Claude Opus 4.6 (57.3), and Gemini 3.1 Pro (54.2). The model is designed for long-horizon agentic tasks and can run autonomously for up to 8 hours across thousands of iterations on a single problem. The agentic capabilities include extended context retention, tool-calling with recovery loops, and a reinforcement-trained "persistence" mode that keeps the model on-task through failures and dead ends rather than surfacing errors to the user. The model was trained entirely on Huawei Ascend 910B chips using the MindSpore framework — no US silicon, no CUDA. The geopolitical dimension is as significant as the technical one: GLM-5.1 is direct evidence that US export controls on Nvidia hardware have not meaningfully slowed China's frontier model development. The 8-hour autonomous execution window is also a step-change from current agentic systems that struggle past 20-30 minutes of coherent work — if this benchmark holds up in real-world testing, it's a genuine advancement in the class of problems AI agents can independently solve.

M

AI Models

Meta Llama 4

Open-weight multimodal MoE models with 10M context — free to run

Ship

100%

Panel ship

Community

Free

Entry

Meta released Llama 4 Scout and Llama 4 Maverick on April 5, 2026 — the first open-weight natively multimodal models built with a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture. Scout is a 17B active parameter model with 16 experts that fits on a single NVIDIA H100, with an industry-leading 10 million token context window. Maverick is also 17B active parameters but with 128 experts, delivering performance that benchmarks comparably to GPT-4o and DeepSeek v3 on reasoning and coding tasks. Both models process text, images, and video inputs, and are freely available for download on Hugging Face and llama.com. Llama 4 Scout was trained on 40 trillion tokens of data. The MoE architecture means the models punch well above their weight in active parameter count — Scout competes with models 5-10x its size on many benchmarks, while keeping inference costs low. This release closes the gap between open and proprietary models significantly. Organizations that previously needed to pay for GPT-4o or Claude for multimodal tasks can now run comparable capability locally or via any cloud provider. For the open-source AI ecosystem, Llama 4 is the biggest release of 2026 so far.

Decision
GLM-5.1
Meta Llama 4
Panel verdict
Mixed · 2 ship / 2 skip
Ship · 4 ship / 0 skip
Community
No community votes yet
No community votes yet
Pricing
API (pricing TBD)
Free / Open Weight (Meta Llama 4 Community License)
Best for
#1 on SWE-Bench Pro — 744B MoE model that runs autonomously for 8 hours
Open-weight multimodal MoE models with 10M context — free to run
Category
AI Models
AI Models

Reviewer scorecard

Builder
80/100 · ship

If the 8-hour autonomous execution claim is real and not cherry-picked, this changes the calculus for using AI on genuinely hard engineering problems. SWE-Bench Pro #1 is also a credible metric — I want to test this on my own repos immediately.

80/100 · ship

A multimodal MoE model that fits on a single H100 and handles 10M context is insane for the price of free. Scout is the model I'll be running for 80% of production workloads going forward — the economics versus GPT-4o or Claude don't even compare. Deploy it now.

Skeptic
45/100 · skip

SWE-Bench benchmarks have historically shown poor correlation with real-world coding productivity, and the '8-hour autonomous' claim needs independent validation. Z.AI is also a relatively unknown quantity compared to Anthropic or Google — API reliability and pricing are completely unproven.

80/100 · ship

I'll still reach for frontier proprietary models for the hardest reasoning tasks and production-critical applications where errors are costly. But I can't deny that Llama 4 Scout closes the gap more than I expected. The 10M context on Scout is genuinely unprecedented for open weights.

Futurist
80/100 · ship

The strategic significance of a Chinese lab hitting #1 on the coding benchmark using zero US hardware cannot be overstated. The export control strategy is officially not working as intended, and GLM-5.1 will accelerate the geopolitical AI arms race in ways that reshape the entire industry.

80/100 · ship

Llama 4 will commoditize multimodal AI the same way Llama 2 commoditized text generation. The 10M context window in an open-weight model is a civilizational-level unlock for researchers, non-profits, and countries that can't afford to depend on US cloud providers for advanced AI.

Creator
45/100 · skip

For creative work, I need a model with strong multimodal capabilities and reliable API access — both unproven for GLM-5.1. The coding benchmark lead is impressive but not directly relevant to my workflows. I'll wait for independent reviews before switching.

80/100 · ship

An open-weight model that understands images and video means I can build custom creative pipelines without routing everything through proprietary APIs. For studios, agencies, and indie creators, Llama 4 fundamentally changes the cost structure of AI-assisted production.

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

GLM-5.1 vs Meta Llama 4: Which AI Tool Should You Ship? — Ship or Skip