Claude Sonnet 5 vs GLM 5V Turbo
Compare Claude Sonnet 5 and GLM 5V Turbo side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Open Prompt, OCR, Classification, and Image Captioning.
Compare Claude Sonnet 5 vs GLM 5V Turbo live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs GLM 5V Turbo on Vision Evals
Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where GLM 5V Turbo leads 56.5% to 36.1%.
Overall, Claude Sonnet 5 averages 66.4% (#21 of 33) against 65.3% (#25 of 33) for GLM 5V Turbo.
GLM 5V Turbo is cheaper ($0.0031 vs $0.0064 per sample), while Claude Sonnet 5 is faster (4.8s vs 6.3s per sample).
Claude Sonnet 5 vs GLM 5V Turbo Comparison Table
Evals updated August 26, 2026Pricing updated August 26, 2026
| Property | Claude Sonnet 5 | GLM 5V Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | Z.ai |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jun 2026 | Apr 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 200K |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $1.20 |
| Output $/1M | $10.00 | $4.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 66.4% | 65.3% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0064 | $0.0031 |
| Avg speed / sample | 4.84s | 6.35s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection | 36.1% $0.011 | 56.5% $0.0052 |
| Counting | 56.8% $0.0030 | 48.6% $0.0017 |
| Identification | 81.3% $0.0027 | 84.4% $0.0015 |
| OCR | 91.7% $0.0078 | 89.3% $0.0030 |
| Data Extraction | 89.7% $0.0030 | 81.4% $0.0018 |
| Reasoning (low) | 43.0% $0.0032 | 31.8% $0.0017 |
| Reasoning (high) | 43.0% $0.0043 | 49.7% $0.0069 |
Claude Sonnet 5 vs GLM 5V Turbo: Overview
Claude Sonnet 5 is a mid-tier large language model from Anthropic, released on June 30, 2026, as the latest model in the Sonnet series and a direct successor to Claude Sonnet 4.6. It is a hybrid reasoning model designed primarily for agentic workflows, software coding, and professional tasks. The model features a 1 million token context window, a 128k maximum output token limit, and runs adaptive thinking by default, giving API users fine-grained control over reasoning effort across five levels (low, medium, high, max, and extra-high). It uses an updated tokenizer shared with Opus 4.7 and later models, which produces approximately 30% more tokens for equivalent text compared to earlier Claude models. On benchmarks, Sonnet 5 scores 63.2% on agentic coding and 81.2% on OSWorld, narrowing the gap with Opus 4.8 while remaining at Sonnet-tier pricing.
The model supports text and image input with text output, and accepts tools including browsers and terminals for autonomous multi-step task execution. Anthropic's safety evaluations report that Sonnet 5 shows a lower rate of undesirable behaviors than Sonnet 4.6 and is generally safer in agentic contexts, with improved resistance to prompt injection and reduced sycophancy. Cybersecurity safeguards equivalent to those on Opus 4.7 and 4.8 are active, though Anthropic notes the model was not deliberately trained on cybersecurity tasks. The model is proprietary and API-only, with no open weights.
GLM-5V-Turbo is a native multimodal model from Z.ai that extends the GLM family with joint image, video, and text input aimed at vision-centered coding and agent workflows. The model reads screenshots, design drafts, document layouts, and interface captures and generates runnable code from them, covering tasks such as turning a visual design into a working front end, diagnosing rendering and layout defects from screen captures, and operating graphical user interfaces during long-horizon agent runs. It accepts roughly 200,000 input tokens and can emit up to 131,072 output tokens in a single response, which supports sessions that hold specifications, source files, logs, and visual references at the same time.
Training includes a joint reinforcement learning stage spanning more than 30 tasks simultaneously, an approach Z.ai describes as a way to counter the trade-off in which improving visual recognition degrades programming ability and the reverse. Reported evaluations cover pure-text coding on the backend, frontend, and repository exploration tracks of CC-Bench-V2, together with agent execution suites such as PinchBench, ClawEval, and ZClawBench, indicating that text coding behavior is retained after visual input is added.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Sonnet 5 performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 66.4% (#21 of 33) against 65.3% (#25 of 33) for GLM 5V Turbo. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark, GLM 5V Turbo leads with 56.5% against 36.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
GLM 5V Turbo is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0031 per sample against $0.0064. Claude Sonnet 5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output; GLM 5V Turbo is priced at $1.20 per 1M input tokens and $4.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Claude Sonnet 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 4.8s per inference against 6.3s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for object detection and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.