Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6.
Two AI models dropped in the same week.
Everyone’s asking which one is better.
I tested them both on the same tasks for 30 hours.
The results were not what I expected.
Watch the video tutorial below:
🚀 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
💥 The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Problem Nobody’s Talking About
Most people pick an AI model because someone on Twitter said it’s good.
Then they waste 10 hours trying to make it work.
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 debate is different.
These aren’t just updates.
They’re completely different approaches to AI coding.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 runs for 30 hours without stopping.
GLM 4.6 can process 200,000 tokens at once.
But which one actually helps you make money?
I spent real money testing Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6.
One saved me 15 hours on a single project.
The other gave me more detailed outputs but took longer.
Here’s what happened.
🎯 Breaking Down Claude Sonnet 4.5 in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Fight
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison starts with understanding what you’re dealing with.
Anthropic built Claude Sonnet 4.5 for one thing.
Autonomy.
The old Claude model ran for 7 hours max.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 runs for 30 hours.
That’s 4x longer than before in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Think about what that means for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
You start a project at 9pm.
Go to bed.
Wake up at 7am.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is still working on it.
No babysitting needed.
But Claude Sonnet 4.5 got other upgrades too.
Claude Code now has checkpoints built into Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Something breaks?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 goes back to the last checkpoint.
Fixes it.
Keeps going.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has code execution built in too.
This means Claude Sonnet 4.5 writes code and tests it automatically.
No manual testing needed with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
And here’s the crazy part about Claude Sonnet 4.5.
It creates spreadsheets, slides, and docs natively.
Tell Claude Sonnet 4.5 to build an app and make a presentation about it.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 does both.
In one session.
The benchmarks for Claude Sonnet 4.5 are insane too.
Big improvements in reasoning compared to older models.
Math performance went up with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Long context tasks?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 crushes them now.
OS World benchmarks show Claude Sonnet 4.5 dominating most tests.
This matters for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Want to learn how to use Claude Sonnet 4.5 for your business? The AI Profit Boardroom gives you training, SOPs, and automation templates.
⚡ What GLM 4.6 Brings to the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Battle
GPU AI released GLM 4.6 right after Claude Sonnet 4.5 dropped.
The timing wasn’t a coincidence for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 fight.
GLM 4.6 focused on different strengths than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Improved reasoning across the board with GLM 4.6.
Better tool use during inference.
Stronger coding performance compared to the old GLM 4.5.
But the big thing about GLM 4.6 in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison?
Context window size.
GLM 4.6 starts at 128,000 tokens.
Some versions go up to 200,000 tokens.
That’s way bigger than most models in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
What does that mean for GLM 4.6?
You can feed it massive amounts of information at once.
Entire codebases with GLM 4.6.
Dozens of documents with GLM 4.6.
All in one prompt.
GLM 4.6 is also getting integrated fast into coding tools.
Z.AI API supports GLM 4.6.
Open Router has GLM 4.6.
Kilo Code is adding GLM 4.6 support.
The ecosystem around GLM 4.6 is growing.
GPU’s benchmarks claim GLM 4.6 matches some Sonnet models on certain tasks.
Clear gains across multiple benchmarks for GLM 4.6.
But here’s the catch in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
GLM 4.6 still trails Claude Sonnet 4.5 on pure coding tasks.
Not by much in some tests.
But enough to matter for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
📈 Real Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Benchmark Comparison
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 benchmarks show three key areas.
Reasoning, coding, and long context work.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 for Reasoning:
Both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 are strong here.
GLM 4.6 shows great performance on reasoning benchmarks.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 improved a ton over older versions.
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 reasoning battle is basically tied.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 for Coding:
Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins.
Not even close.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 was built for coding tasks.
Writing code with Claude Sonnet 4.5 is faster.
Debugging with Claude Sonnet 4.5 is cleaner.
Error handling with Claude Sonnet 4.5 is automatic.
GLM 4.6 is good at coding but not as good as Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 for Long Context:
This is where the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle gets interesting.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 runs for 30 hours straight.
GLM 4.6 has a bigger context window.
If you need to process huge amounts of data at once, GLM 4.6 might beat Claude Sonnet 4.5.
If you need long-running autonomy, Claude Sonnet 4.5 beats GLM 4.6.
Different strengths in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
But I wanted real tests, not just benchmarks.
So I tested both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 myself.
Want to automate your marketing and save hundreds of hours? Join the AI Profit Boardroom for weekly mastermind calls and automation templates.
🔬 My Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Real-World Coding Battle
I set up a proper test for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
Same task for both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6.
No advantages for either one.
Build a Python CLI app that reads a CSV file.
Does calculations on the data.
Outputs a slide deck with results.
Runs tests automatically.
Fixes any test failures.
Provides checkpoints after each step.
This is exactly what you’d use Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6 for in real life.
Not some fake benchmark test.
I started with Claude Sonnet 4.5 for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 broke everything into clear steps immediately.
Created the Python file.
Set up the CSV reader.
Ran the calculations.
Built the slide deck generator.
Then Claude Sonnet 4.5 ran all the tests.
One test failed.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 caught it without me saying anything.
Fixed the error.
Ran tests again.
All passed.
Time for Claude Sonnet 4.5: 12 minutes total.
The code was clean and readable.
Tests all passed.
Got a working slide deck at the end.
Zero intervention needed from me with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Now for GLM 4.6 in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
GLM 4.6 also broke the task into steps.
Created the Python file like Claude Sonnet 4.5 did.
But GLM 4.6 spent more time explaining each step.
More verbose than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
The code GLM 4.6 wrote was solid though.
No complaints there.
When GLM 4.6 got to testing, one issue came up.
GLM 4.6 hit a test failure.
But GLM 4.6 didn’t automatically fix it like Claude Sonnet 4.5 did.
I had to prompt GLM 4.6 again to fix the error.
After my second prompt, GLM 4.6 fixed everything.
Tests passed.
Time for GLM 4.6: 15 minutes total.
Final result was good from GLM 4.6.
But it needed more help than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Winner of this Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 coding test: Claude Sonnet 4.5
Three reasons Claude Sonnet 4.5 won:
Speed – Claude Sonnet 4.5 finished 3 minutes faster.
Autonomy – Claude Sonnet 4.5 fixed errors without prompting.
Reliability – Claude Sonnet 4.5 needed zero intervention.
That’s what you want in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Quality control is critical here.
Always review outputs from Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6 before using them in production.
AI makes mistakes.
You’re the final check.
📊 Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Long Context Document Test
Second test for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
I uploaded 15 documents to both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6.
Design specs.
Requirements docs.
User feedback.
Meeting notes.
Everything.
Then I gave both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 the same instruction.
Read all 15 documents.
Create a five-step implementation plan.
Prioritize by effort and impact.
This is real work in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
If you manage projects, you deal with this constantly.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 processed all the documents first.
Took about 3 minutes for Claude Sonnet 4.5 to read everything.
Then Claude Sonnet 4.5 gave me a five-step plan.
Clean and organized.
Priorities made perfect sense from Claude Sonnet 4.5.
It understood which tasks had the biggest impact.
Explained the effort needed for each step.
Good work from Claude Sonnet 4.5 in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Now GLM 4.6 for the same test.
GLM 4.6 also processed all 15 documents.
But here’s where GLM 4.6 showed its strength in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
The bigger context window helped GLM 4.6.
GLM 4.6 retained more details from each document than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
The five-step plan from GLM 4.6 was similar to Claude Sonnet 4.5.
But GLM 4.6 included way more specific references.
GLM 4.6 would say “based on user feedback in document 7.”
Or “the design spec in document 3 suggests this approach.”
That level of detail from GLM 4.6 was impressive.
More thorough than Claude Sonnet 4.5 for this task.
Time for GLM 4.6: about 4 minutes.
Slower than Claude Sonnet 4.5 but more detailed.
Winner of this Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test: Tie
Depends what you need in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Speed? Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins.
Maximum detail? GLM 4.6 wins.
Both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 did the job well.
Different strengths for different needs.
Need help setting up AI automation like this for your business? Book an AI Discovery Session here.
🏅 My Real Verdict on Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6
After all these tests, here’s my take on Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6.
For coding work, Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the winner.
No question.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is faster than GLM 4.6.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 handles errors better than GLM 4.6.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 needs less handholding than GLM 4.6.
The 30-hour autonomy of Claude Sonnet 4.5 is a gamechanger.
The checkpoints in Claude Sonnet 4.5 make it reliable.
The code execution in Claude Sonnet 4.5 means it tests itself.
If you’re a developer, Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
If you’re building coding agents, Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the choice.
But GLM 4.6 has its place in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
If you need massive context windows, GLM 4.6 beats Claude Sonnet 4.5.
If you’re in the Z.AI ecosystem, GLM 4.6 integrates easily.
If you need super detailed document analysis, GLM 4.6 retains more.
The reasoning in GLM 4.6 is strong.
The 200,000 token context window of GLM 4.6 is huge.
For some tasks, GLM 4.6 gives more thorough outputs than Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Plus GLM 4.6 might be cheaper for high-volume work.
If you run thousands of queries, test GLM 4.6 on your workload.
Compare costs between Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 for your specific use case.
Want more traffic and sales from SEO? Join the SEO Elite Circle to learn strategies that actually work.
🎯 Copy These Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Prompts
Here are the exact prompts I used for Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 testing.
Test them yourself to see which wins for your work.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Coding Prompt:
“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.”
Simple prompt for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 coding test.
Clear instructions.
No fluff.
Works with both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Long Context Prompt:
“You are an agent. Ingest these 20 design docs and produce a five-step implementation plan prioritized by effort and impact.”
Again, simple for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
Direct and clear.
Both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 understand this easily.
That’s the key to good prompting in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Don’t overcomplicate.
Be clear about what you want.
Let Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6 do the heavy lifting.
Want 200+ ChatGPT SEO prompts plus a free SEO course? Get them here.
💼 How the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Battle Changes Your Business
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle isn’t just about tech specs.
It’s about what you can actually do with these tools.
If you run an agency, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6 changes everything.
Coding that took your developers 5 hours?
Now takes 15 minutes with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Document analysis that took 2 days?
Now takes 5 minutes with GLM 4.6.
This is massive in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
Your competitors are using Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6 right now.
If you’re not, you’re falling behind in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 race.
Let’s say you’re building a SaaS product.
You need a new feature with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
You need tests written with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
You need bugs fixed with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
You need documentation with Claude Sonnet 4.5.
That’s a week of work traditionally.
Now you give Claude Sonnet 4.5 one detailed prompt.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 writes all the code.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 tests everything.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 fixes all the bugs.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 creates the documentation.
You review it and ship.
Done in hours, not weeks.
That’s the power of the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
This isn’t hype about Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6.
It’s real and it’s happening now.
If you’re not testing Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6, you’re missing opportunities.
Big opportunities to save time and make money.
Join our FREE AI SEO Accelerator to learn more about using AI tools like Claude Sonnet 4.5.
❓ Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 FAQs
Q: Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than GLM 4.6 for coding?
A: Yes. 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 solid but needs more handholding for coding tasks.
Q: What’s the main difference between Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6?
A: Claude Sonnet 4.5 runs for 30 hours straight with better autonomy. GLM 4.6 has a bigger context window (200,000 tokens) for processing more data at once. Different strengths in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Q: Can GLM 4.6 replace Claude Sonnet 4.5?
A: Not for coding. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is still better for writing and debugging code. But GLM 4.6 can replace Claude Sonnet 4.5 for massive document processing tasks in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
Q: Which is more cost-effective, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6?
A: GLM 4.6 might be cheaper for high-volume work. Test both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 on your specific workload to compare real costs in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Q: Where can I access 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 Kilo Code for the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 test.
Q: Does Claude Sonnet 4.5 work better with checkpoints than GLM 4.6?
A: Yes. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has built-in checkpoints that let it recover from errors automatically. GLM 4.6 doesn’t have this feature yet in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
Q: Can I use both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GLM 4.6 together?
A: Yes. Use Claude Sonnet 4.5 for coding tasks and GLM 4.6 for massive document processing. They complement each other in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
🚀 Next Steps After the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 Battle
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle shows one thing clearly.
AI is changing how we work.
Fast.
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 tools.
Test both for your specific use case in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 comparison.
See which one saves you more time.
See which one makes you more money.
That’s what matters in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle.
Want to scale your business with AI and save hundreds of hours? Join the AI Profit Boardroom.
We help you automate your marketing, scale your business, and save time with cutting-edge AI strategies tested by me.
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 for world-class SEO training.
Get 50+ Free AI SEO Tools Here to start using tools like Claude Sonnet 4.5 today.
Need AI automation services for your business? Book a call here to get help implementing Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM 4.6.
The Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 battle proves AI isn’t hype anymore.
It’s real.
It’s powerful.
It’s changing everything.
Don’t get left behind in the Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM 4.6 race.
Start testing today.
