Roboflow

GLM 5V Turbo vs Grok 4.6

Compare GLM 5V Turbo and Grok 4.6 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.

Compare GLM 5V Turbo vs Grok 4.6 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.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
Z.aiGLM 5V Turbo
Run to compare this model.
GrokGrok 4.6
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

GLM 5V Turbo vs Grok 4.6 on Vision Evals

Grok 4.6 scores higher on 3 of the five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where GLM 5V Turbo leads 56.5% to 23.8%.

Overall, GLM 5V Turbo averages 54.6% (#47 of 61) against 59.1% (#34 of 61) for Grok 4.6.

GLM 5V Turbo is both cheaper ($0.0037 vs $0.011 per sample) and faster (5.9s vs 19.3s per sample).

GLM 5V TurboGrok 4.6

GLM 5V Turbo vs Grok 4.6 Comparison Table

Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 9, 2026

PropertyGLM 5V TurboGrok 4.6
OrganizationZ.aiSpaceXAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateApr 2026Aug 2026
Context Window200K500K
ParametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.20$2.00
Output $/1M$4.00$6.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
54.6%
59.1%
Avg cost / sample$0.0037$0.011
Avg speed / sample5.89s19.32s
By task
Object Detection (low)
56.5%
$0.0052
23.8%
±2.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 20.2 to 25.9
$0.013
Object Detection (high)–
24.0%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 23.1 to 25.1
$0.041
Counting (low)
48.6%
$0.0017
65.8%
±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.2 to 70.3
$0.0079
Counting (high)–
56.8%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 58.1
$0.027
Identification (low)
84.4%
$0.0015
84.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0055
Identification (high)–
85.4%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5
$0.015
OCR (low)
51.5%
$0.0039
60.6%
$0.011
by category
Single value
43.0%
Transcription
78.0%
Structured JSON
67.5%
Text localization
17.7%
Single value
50.0%
Transcription
89.0%
Structured JSON
84.4%
Text localization
11.0%
OCR (high)
56.0%
$0.0080
61.2%
$0.030
by category
Single value
44.4%
Transcription
77.8%
Structured JSON
69.6%
Text localization
38.7%
Single value
50.9%
Transcription
88.7%
Structured JSON
85.7%
Text localization
9.4%
Reasoning (low)
31.8%
$0.0017
61.1%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.6 to 62.3
$0.0093
Reasoning (high)
49.7%
$0.0069
63.8%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.3 to 66.2
$0.032

GLM 5V Turbo vs Grok 4.6: Overview

GLM 5V Turbo

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.

Grok 4.6

Grok 4.6 is a proprietary reasoning model from xAI aimed at long-running agentic workflows, coding, and knowledge work. It accepts text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window and a knowledge cutoff of February 1, 2026. The model exposes an adjustable reasoning budget with low, medium, high, and xhigh settings, where high is the default, and it supports function calling, structured outputs, web and X search, and code execution as documented tool behaviors. Its visual capability covers interpreting images supplied alongside text prompts, which places it in the visual question answering and document understanding family, and it can also return object detection boxes as text coordinates when prompted.

xAI characterizes Grok 4.6 as the result of an extended post-training run over the Grok 4.5 lineage rather than a new pretrained base. The described recipe combines curated model-generated reasoning and technical data, engineering data, a revised optimizer, regenerated supervised fine-tuning trajectories, and reinforcement learning across agent environments spanning knowledge work, coding, kernel optimization, web development, and computer-aided design. Parameter count and architecture specifics are not disclosed. Independent measurement from Artificial Analysis places the model at 61 on its Intelligence Index, five points above Grok 4.5.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Grok 4.6 performed better. It scores higher on 3 of the five vision tasks and averages 59.1% (#34 of 61) against 54.6% (#47 of 61) for GLM 5V Turbo. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, GLM 5V Turbo leads with 56.5% against 23.8%. 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 $0.0037 per sample against $0.011. GLM 5V Turbo is priced at $1.20 per 1M input tokens and $4.00 per 1M output; Grok 4.6 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $6.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GLM 5V Turbo is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 5.9s per inference against 19.3s. 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 image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.