Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 just became the biggest AI coding battle of 2025.
I gave them both the exact same coding tasks.
One finished in 12 minutes with zero errors.
The other needed my help halfway through.
Watch the video tutorial below to see which one won:
🚀 Get a FREE SEO strategy Session + Discount Now
Want to get more customers, make more profit & save 100s of hours with AI? Join me in the AI Profit Boardroom
🤯 Want more money, traffic and sales from SEO? Join the SEO Elite Circle
🤖 Need AI Automation Services? Book an AI Discovery Session Here
🔥 Why the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Battle Matters Right Now
Most people are wasting time with the wrong AI coding model.
They pick one because it sounds cool.
Then they spend hours fixing errors that shouldn’t exist.
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 debate is simple.
One model runs for 30 hours straight without stopping.
The other has 200,000 tokens of context.
But which one actually saves you time and money?
I tested both Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 models on real coding tasks.
The results shocked me.
⚡ What Makes Claude Sonnet 4.5 Different in This Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 starts with understanding what Anthropic built.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is a beast.
The old version ran for 7 hours on its own.
This new Claude Sonnet 4.5 runs for 30 hours.
That’s over four times longer than before.
You can give Claude Sonnet 4.5 a massive project before bed.
Wake up and it’s still working.
That’s insane for any Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
Claude Code got huge updates with Claude Sonnet 4.5 too.
It now has checkpoints built in.
If something breaks in Claude Sonnet 4.5, it goes back and fixes itself.
It has code execution so Claude Sonnet 4.5 can test its own code.
It creates spreadsheets, slides and docs without help.
This makes the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle interesting.
You can tell Claude Sonnet 4.5 to build an app, test it, and make a presentation.
All in one go.
The benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 look crazy too.
Big gains in reasoning and math compared to older versions.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 crushes tasks that used to trip up AI models.
For long context work, Claude Sonnet 4.5 performs way better than before.
The OS World benchmarks show Claude Sonnet 4.5 dominating.
If you want the training and SOPs on using Claude Sonnet 4.5 for your business, check out the AI Profit Boardroom.
🚀 GLM 4.6 Enters the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Fight
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 gets more interesting when you see what GLM brings.
This is GPU AI’s latest model.
GLM 4.6 focuses on different things than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
The main upgrades for GLM 4.6 are improved reasoning.
Better tool use during inference.
Stronger coding performance compared to GLM 4.5.
But here’s what matters for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
GLM 4.6 has a much larger context window.
We’re talking 128,000 tokens going up to 200,000 tokens.
That’s massive compared to most models in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
GLM 4.6 is already getting into coding tools fast.
You can use GLM 4.6 through the Z.AI API and Open Router.
Tools like Kilo Code are adding GLM 4.6 support.
The ecosystem for GLM 4.6 is growing fast.
GPU’s writeups claim clear gains across multiple benchmarks for GLM 4.6.
They say GLM 4.6 has parity with some Sonnet models on several tasks.
But here’s the catch in this Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
GLM 4.6 is still trailing Claude Sonnet 4.5 on coding in some tests.
It’s not a clear winner in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
It depends on what you’re doing with the model.
📊 Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Benchmark Breakdown
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 benchmarks tell an interesting story.
I made a simple comparison for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
Three categories: reasoning, coding, and long context agenting.
Reasoning in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Battle:
Both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 are strong here.
GLM 4.6 shows really good performance on reasoning tasks.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 also improved a lot compared to older versions.
For pure reasoning, the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison is close.
Coding in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Test:
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the clear winner here.
It’s built for coding tasks.
The coding benchmarks show Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the best model right now.
Writing code, debugging code, fixing errors – Claude Sonnet 4.5 dominates.
GLM 4.6 is good at coding but not quite there yet in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Long Context Agenting for Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6:
This is where the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison gets nuanced.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 can run for 30 hours straight.
That’s the big selling point for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
GLM 4.6 has a bigger context window than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
If you need to process massive amounts of information at once, GLM 4.6 might beat Claude Sonnet 4.5.
But benchmarks don’t tell the whole story of Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6.
I had to test both myself.
Want to automate your business and get more customers while saving hundreds of hours? The AI Profit Boardroom helps you scale with cutting-edge AI strategies.
🎯 My Real Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Coding Test
First Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Test: Coding Challenge
I gave both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 the exact same task.
Build a Python CLI app.
Take in a CSV file.
Do some calculations.
Output a slide deck with the results.
Run tests and fix any failures.
Provide checkpoints after each major step.
This is realistic for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
It’s what you’d actually use AI for in a real business.
I started the timers for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 coding test.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 went first.
It immediately broke the task into steps.
Created the Python file.
Set up the CSV reader.
Did the calculations.
Built the slide deck generator.
After that, Claude Sonnet 4.5 ran tests.
One test failed.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 caught the error and fixed it on its own.
Ran the tests again.
Everything passed.
Total time for Claude Sonnet 4.5: about 12 minutes.
The code was clean.
The tests passed.
I got a working slide deck at the end.
I was impressed with Claude Sonnet 4.5 in this Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
Then I ran GLM 4.6 for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
GLM 4.6 also broke the task into steps.
Created the Python file.
But here’s where GLM 4.6 differed from Claude Sonnet 4.5.
GLM 4.6 spent more time explaining what it was doing.
The code GLM 4.6 wrote was solid.
But when GLM 4.6 got to testing, it had one issue.
GLM 4.6 didn’t automatically fix the test failure on the first try.
I had to prompt GLM 4.6 again.
After that, GLM 4.6 fixed it and everything worked.
Total time for GLM 4.6: about 15 minutes.
The final result from GLM 4.6 was good.
But GLM 4.6 needed more handholding than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Winner for this Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test: Claude Sonnet 4.5
Claude Sonnet 4.5 was faster.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 handled test failures automatically.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 needed less intervention.
That’s what you want in a coding agent for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
📚 Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Long Context Test
Second Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Test: Long Context Agent Workflow
I gave both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 a massive task.
I uploaded 15 different documents.
Design specs, requirements, user feedback, everything.
Then I told Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 to read all of it.
Create a five-step implementation plan.
The plan needed to be prioritized by effort and impact.
This is real for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
If you’re managing a project with tons of documents, you need AI to summarize and plan.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 processed all the documents.
It took about 3 minutes for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Then Claude Sonnet 4.5 gave me a clean five-step plan.
The priorities made sense.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 understood which tasks would have the biggest impact.
It explained the effort required for each one.
Solid work from Claude Sonnet 4.5 in this Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
GLM 4.6 also processed the documents.
But here’s where the bigger context window of GLM 4.6 helped in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
GLM 4.6 seemed to retain more details from each document than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
The plan GLM 4.6 gave me was also five steps.
But GLM 4.6 included more specific references to the documents.
Like GLM 4.6 would say “based on the user feedback in document 7” or “the design spec in document 3 suggests this.”
That level of detail from GLM 4.6 was impressive.
Total time for GLM 4.6: about 4 minutes.
A bit slower than Claude Sonnet 4.5 but more thorough.
Winner for this Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test: It’s a tie
If you want speed in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison, go with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
If you want maximum detail and huge context needs, GLM 4.6 is really good.
Quality control is critical when using either Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6 for business tasks.
Always review the outputs before using them.
If you need help with AI automation for your business, book an AI Discovery Session here.
🏆 My Final Verdict on Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6
Here’s my verdict on the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
If you need the best coding model right now, use Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is faster.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 handles errors better.
The 30-hour autonomy of Claude Sonnet 4.5 is a gamechanger for long-running projects.
Plus, the new features in Claude Sonnet 4.5 like checkpoints and code execution make it the most reliable option.
For building and testing code, Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
If you’re a developer or building agents that need to code, Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the one.
But if you need a model that can handle massive amounts of context, GLM 4.6 is worth testing in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
Or if you’re already using the Z.AI ecosystem, try GLM 4.6.
The reasoning of GLM 4.6 is strong.
The context window of GLM 4.6 is huge.
For some tasks, GLM 4.6 gives you more detailed outputs than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Plus, GLM 4.6 might be cheaper for high volume inference.
If you’re running lots of queries and need cost efficiency, test GLM 4.6 on your specific workload.
Compare it against Claude Sonnet 4.5 for your use case.
💡 Exact Prompts for Your Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Tests
Let me give you the exact prompts I used for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 tests.
You can test this yourself.
For the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 coding task:
“You are an expert developer. Given this repository, implement feature X, add unit tests, run tests, and if any tests fail, fix them. Provide checkpoints after file creation, after tests, and after fixes. Summarize final test status and runtime.”
That’s it for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 coding prompt.
Simple, clear, and it works.
For the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 long context task:
“You are an agent. Ingest these 20 design docs and produce a five-step implementation plan prioritized by effort and impact.”
Again, simple and direct for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
That’s the key to good prompting.
Don’t overcomplicate it when testing Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6.
Want 200+ ChatGPT prompts and a free SEO course? Grab them here.
🚀 What This Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Battle Means for Your Business
If you’re running an agency, you need to be using Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6.
Period.
Coding tasks that used to take your team hours can now be done in minutes with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Document analysis that used to take days can be done in seconds with GLM 4.6.
This is a massive productivity boost from the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
If you’re not using Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6, your competitors are.
You’re falling behind in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 race.
Let’s say you’re a developer building a SaaS product.
You need to add a new feature with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Write tests with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Fix bugs with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Document everything with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
That used to be a multi-day project.
Now you give Claude Sonnet 4.5 a detailed prompt.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 writes the code.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 tests it.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 fixes the bugs.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 even writes the documentation.
You just review it and ship it.
That’s insane from the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
This is why I’m so bullish on Claude Sonnet 4.5 and AI in general.
It’s not hype.
It’s real and changing how we work.
If you’re not using Claude Sonnet 4.5 or testing GLM 4.6 yet, you’re missing massive opportunities.
Want more leads, traffic, and sales with AI? Join our FREE AI SEO Accelerator here.
❓ FAQs About Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6
Q: Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6?
A: Claude Sonnet 4.5 is better for coding. In my Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 tests, Claude Sonnet 4.5 was faster and handled errors automatically. GLM 4.6 is good but needs more handholding.
Q: Does GLM 4.6 beat Claude Sonnet 4.5 for long context tasks?
A: It depends. GLM 4.6 has a bigger context window than Claude Sonnet 4.5 (200,000 tokens vs Claude Sonnet 4.5’s standard window). For massive document processing, GLM 4.6 retains more details. But Claude Sonnet 4.5 is faster.
Q: Can Claude Sonnet 4.5 really run for 30 hours straight?
A: Yes. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 30 hours of autonomy. The old version ran for 7 hours. This makes Claude Sonnet 4.5 perfect for long-running projects in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Q: Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6?
A: GLM 4.6 might be cheaper for high-volume inference. Test both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 on your specific workload to compare costs in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
Q: Where can I use Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6?
A: Claude Sonnet 4.5 is available through Anthropic’s API and Claude Code. GLM 4.6 is available through Z.AI API, Open Router, and tools like Kilo Code.
Q: Should I switch from Claude Sonnet 4.5 to GLM 4.6?
A: No, unless you need the specific features of GLM 4.6. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is still the best for coding. Test both in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle for your use case.
🎯 Final Thoughts on Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle is clear.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins for coding.
GLM 4.6 wins for massive context needs.
Both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 are powerful.
Test both for your specific use case in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
If you want to scale your business with AI like Claude Sonnet 4.5 and save hundreds of hours, join the AI Profit Boardroom.
We help you automate, scale, and save time using cutting-edge AI strategies.
Get weekly mastermind calls, direct support, automation templates, case studies, and a new AI course every month.
Want more money, traffic and sales from SEO? Join the SEO Elite Circle.
Get 50+ Free AI SEO Tools Here.
Need AI automation services? Book a call here.
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle shows AI is changing everything.
Don’t get left behind.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 – now you know which one to use.