| 0 |
| 0 |
| Quality | 0 | 0 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Paid |
| Starting Price | $3.00e-7 per prompt token | $1.05e-6 per prompt token |
| Capabilities | 7 decomposed | 13 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Generates text using a 671B-parameter mixture-of-experts architecture assembled from three DeepSeek checkpoints (R1-0528, R1, V3-0324) via Assembly-of-Experts merge technique. Routes input tokens through sparse expert networks where only a subset of parameters activate per token, reducing computational cost while maintaining model capacity. The merge combines reasoning-optimized (R1) and instruction-following (V3) checkpoints to balance chain-of-thought depth with practical task performance.
Unique: Assembly-of-Experts merge combining R1 reasoning checkpoints with V3 instruction-tuning across 671B parameters, creating a hybrid that preserves chain-of-thought capability while maintaining practical task performance — distinct from single-checkpoint models or simple ensemble averaging
vs alternatives: Offers reasoning-grade model performance with MoE efficiency gains (sparse activation) at lower per-token cost than dense 671B models, while merged checkpoints provide better instruction-following than pure R1 reasoning models
Generates intermediate reasoning steps and explicit thinking traces before producing final answers, leveraging the R1 checkpoint components in the merged model. The model learns to decompose complex problems into substeps, showing work for mathematical reasoning, logical deduction, and multi-stage problem solving. This capability is inherited from DeepSeek-R1's training on reasoning-focused datasets and is preserved through the Assembly-of-Experts merge.
Unique: Preserves R1 checkpoint's chain-of-thought training through Assembly-of-Experts merge, maintaining reasoning trace generation capability while adding V3's instruction-following — unlike pure R1 models that may be less responsive to task-specific instructions, or V3-only models that lack explicit reasoning traces
vs alternatives: Provides transparent reasoning traces comparable to OpenAI o1 but with lower per-token cost via MoE efficiency, while maintaining better instruction-following than pure reasoning models
Generates, completes, and analyzes code across multiple programming languages by leveraging training on diverse code repositories and instruction-tuning from the V3 checkpoint. The model understands code structure, syntax, and semantics for languages including Python, JavaScript, Java, C++, Go, Rust, and others. Supports code generation from natural language descriptions, code completion, refactoring suggestions, and bug analysis through token-level understanding of programming constructs.
Unique: Combines R1's reasoning capability for complex algorithmic problems with V3's instruction-tuned code generation, enabling both step-by-step algorithm explanation and practical code output — unlike pure reasoning models that may struggle with syntax, or code-only models that lack algorithmic reasoning
vs alternatives: Offers reasoning-aware code generation (explaining algorithm choices) with MoE efficiency, providing better algorithmic depth than GitHub Copilot while maintaining practical instruction-following
Follows complex, multi-part instructions and adapts behavior to task-specific requirements through training on the V3-0324 checkpoint, which emphasizes instruction-tuning and alignment. The model interprets nuanced directives about output format, tone, style, and constraints, and maintains consistency across multi-turn conversations. This capability enables the model to function as a specialized assistant for domain-specific tasks without requiring fine-tuning.
Unique: V3 checkpoint's instruction-tuning combined with R1's reasoning creates models that both follow complex directives precisely AND explain their reasoning for task-specific decisions — unlike instruction-only models that may lack reasoning depth, or reasoning-only models that may ignore formatting requirements
vs alternatives: Provides instruction-following quality comparable to GPT-4 with added reasoning transparency, while MoE architecture reduces per-token cost compared to dense instruction-tuned models of equivalent capability
Maintains conversation history and context across multiple turns within a single API session, enabling coherent multi-turn dialogue where the model references previous messages and builds on prior context. The model tracks conversation state, understands pronouns and references to earlier statements, and adapts responses based on accumulated context. This is implemented through standard transformer attention mechanisms that process the full conversation history as input tokens.
Unique: Merged checkpoint approach preserves both R1's reasoning consistency across turns and V3's instruction-following, enabling conversations that maintain logical coherence while adapting to user-specified conversation styles or constraints
vs alternatives: Provides multi-turn conversation capability with reasoning transparency (showing why model made contextual decisions), while MoE efficiency reduces per-turn cost compared to dense models for long conversations
Solves mathematical problems including algebra, calculus, statistics, and symbolic reasoning through training on mathematical datasets and R1 checkpoint's reasoning capability. The model can work through multi-step mathematical proofs, show intermediate calculations, and explain mathematical concepts. It understands mathematical notation, can parse equations, and applies appropriate mathematical techniques to problem categories.
Unique: R1 checkpoint's training on mathematical reasoning datasets combined with V3's instruction clarity enables both deep mathematical reasoning AND clear explanation of solutions — unlike pure reasoning models that may show work but lack pedagogical clarity, or instruction models that may lack mathematical depth
vs alternatives: Provides reasoning-grade mathematical problem solving with explicit step-by-step explanations, offering better transparency than black-box calculators while maintaining practical instruction-following for educational contexts
Provides text generation through OpenRouter's REST API with support for streaming responses (server-sent events) and batch processing. Requests are routed through OpenRouter's infrastructure, which handles load balancing, rate limiting, and provider selection. Streaming enables real-time token delivery for interactive applications, while batch processing allows asynchronous processing of multiple requests with optimized throughput. The API accepts standard OpenAI-compatible request formats.
Unique: OpenRouter's unified API abstracts away provider-specific implementation details while maintaining OpenAI API compatibility, enabling applications to switch between DeepSeek and other models without code changes — unlike direct provider APIs that require model-specific client libraries
vs alternatives: Provides managed inference with automatic load balancing and provider failover, reducing operational overhead compared to self-hosted deployment while maintaining lower per-token cost than direct OpenAI API access
GLM-5.1 executes multi-step coding tasks over extended timeframes without requiring human intervention between steps, using an internal planning mechanism that decomposes complex objectives into sub-tasks and maintains execution state across sequential operations. Unlike minute-level interaction models that require prompting after each step, this capability enables the model to autonomously navigate decision trees, handle errors, and adapt strategy based on intermediate results without context resets.
Unique: Designed specifically for minute+ autonomous execution windows rather than single-turn interactions; maintains internal execution state and decision-making across extended task horizons without requiring external orchestration or re-prompting between steps
vs alternatives: Outperforms GPT-4 and Claude for long-horizon coding tasks because it's architected for continuous autonomous operation rather than stateless request-response cycles
GLM-5.1 generates and refactors code with awareness of the full codebase structure, dependencies, and patterns, using semantic understanding of how changes in one file propagate to others. The model analyzes import graphs, function signatures, and usage patterns across files to ensure generated code maintains consistency and doesn't introduce breaking changes, rather than treating each file in isolation.
Unique: Maintains semantic awareness of codebase structure and cross-file dependencies during generation, enabling it to make coordinated changes across multiple files rather than treating each file independently
vs alternatives: Produces more consistent multi-file refactorings than Copilot or Claude because it reasons about the entire codebase context simultaneously rather than file-by-file
Z.ai: GLM 5.1 scores higher at 24/100 vs TNG: DeepSeek R1T2 Chimera at 22/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
GLM-5.1 diagnoses errors and bugs by analyzing error messages, stack traces, and code context to identify root causes and suggest fixes. The model correlates error symptoms with likely causes, explains why errors occur, and provides specific debugging steps or code fixes.
Unique: Diagnoses errors by correlating symptoms with root causes using semantic understanding of code and error patterns, providing explanations and fixes rather than just pattern matching
vs alternatives: More effective at diagnosing subtle bugs than search-based solutions because it reasons about code semantics and error causality
GLM-5.1 identifies performance bottlenecks in code and suggests optimizations with specific implementation guidance, analyzing algorithms, data structures, and resource usage to recommend improvements. The model understands performance implications of different approaches and can suggest algorithmic or architectural changes to improve efficiency.
Unique: Suggests optimizations based on algorithmic and architectural analysis rather than just code-level tweaks, understanding performance implications of different approaches
vs alternatives: Provides more meaningful performance guidance than generic LLMs because it understands algorithm complexity and can suggest structural improvements
GLM-5.1 analyzes code for security vulnerabilities including injection attacks, authentication/authorization issues, cryptographic weaknesses, and data exposure risks, providing specific remediation guidance. The model understands common vulnerability patterns and security best practices to identify risks and suggest secure implementations.
Unique: Identifies security vulnerabilities through semantic analysis of code patterns and provides remediation guidance based on security best practices, not just pattern matching against known CVEs
vs alternatives: More effective at finding context-specific security issues than SAST tools because it understands code intent and can suggest secure implementations
GLM-5.1 performs step-by-step reasoning about code behavior by internally simulating or tracing execution paths, allowing it to predict runtime behavior, identify bugs, and explain code logic without requiring actual execution. This capability uses chain-of-thought-like reasoning applied specifically to code semantics, tracking variable state, control flow, and function call sequences to reason about correctness.
Unique: Applies extended reasoning specifically to code semantics and execution paths, enabling it to predict runtime behavior and identify subtle bugs through symbolic execution simulation rather than pattern matching
vs alternatives: More effective at finding subtle logic bugs than GPT-4 because it explicitly traces execution state rather than relying on pattern recognition
GLM-5.1 maintains rich context across multiple conversation turns when working on code, remembering previous edits, design decisions, and constraints without requiring users to re-specify them. The model builds an internal model of the codebase state and user intent that persists across turns, enabling iterative refinement where each turn builds on previous work rather than starting fresh.
Unique: Maintains stateful context across turns specifically optimized for code collaboration, remembering design decisions and codebase state without explicit memory structures
vs alternatives: Provides better iterative code refinement than stateless models because it retains context about previous edits and design intent across turns
GLM-5.1 translates natural language specifications into code that preserves semantic intent, handling ambiguous or underspecified requirements by inferring reasonable implementations based on context and common patterns. The model uses semantic understanding of both natural language and code to bridge the gap between high-level intent and low-level implementation details.
Unique: Translates natural language to code with explicit semantic fidelity checking, inferring reasonable implementations for underspecified requirements rather than producing literal or incomplete code
vs alternatives: Handles ambiguous requirements better than Copilot because it uses semantic reasoning to infer intent rather than pattern matching against training data
+5 more capabilities