GLM-5.3 vs GPT-6.1 Terra
Which one, when
Up to 272000 input tokens, gpt-6.1-terra has cheaper input but more expensive output than glm-5.3. Choose gpt-6.1-terra for image input and optional reasoning, or glm-5.3 for output-heavy text work.
Benchmarks
GPT-6.1 Terra: the vendor has not published benchmark scores.
Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
Pricing
| GLM-5.3 | GPT-6.1 Terra | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $1.4 | $1 | 1.4× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $4.4 | $5 | 0.88× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.28 | $0.05 | 5.6× |
| Cache write | - | 1.25x (30m) / 2.5x (12h) | - |
Rates from the live catalogue at build time; each model page carries the current rate card.
Where they sit · input price per 1M tokens across all 80 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)
Capabilities
| GLM-5.3 | GPT-6.1 Terra | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | yes | yes |
| Thinking control | always on | configurable |
| Structured output | yes | yes |
| Prompt caching | implicit (automatic) | implicit + explicit |
| Cache lifetime | not published | at least 30m by default, 12h option on the Responses API |
| Minimum cached prefix | not published | 1,024 tokens |
Specs
| GLM-5.3 | GPT-6.1 Terra | |
|---|---|---|
| Input modalities | text | text image |
| Output modalities | text | text |
| Released | 2026-08-14 | 2026-10-26 |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | 2026-06 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.1M |
| Max output | 131K | 128K |
| Thinking parameter | reasoning_effort | reasoning.effort |
| Accepted values | reasoning_effort
| reasoning.effort
|
| Default | max | medium |
Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: GLM-5.3 · GPT-6.1 Terra
One prompt, both models, measured through the gateway
GLM-5.3 passed · 3 sentences
When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating an extensive internal chain-of-thought—thousands of hidden "thinking" tokens the user never sees—before writing any part of the actual answer. Those invisible tokens are billed at output rates, which run several times the price of input tokens, so the billed volume per query jumped even though query volume and per-token pricing stayed the same. The good news is this is a controllable lever, not a rate increase: capping reasoning effort and routing only complex queries to reasoning mode should bring a large share of the added cost back down.
out 681 tok (+562 thinking) latency 18.4 s
GPT-6.1 Terra passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning caused the model to process additional internal tokens before producing each answer, even though those tokens are not visible to users. Those tokens are generally billable, increasing the cost per request and potentially doubling the bill even if usage stayed the same. To confirm the cause, compare request counts, model pricing, and token usage—including reasoning tokens—before and after the change.
out 196 tok (+115 thinking) latency 4.6 s
Instruction following (exactly three sentences, so countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.
GLM-5.3 passed · 8/8 cases
**Fixed:** ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` **The bug:** The function suffers from a unit error — it counts adjacent equal *pairs* rather than *items* in a run. `cur` is seeded at 0, gains 1 per match, and resets to 0 on a mismatch, so a run of k equal elements can only ever drive `cur` to k−1 (a run of k items contains exactly k−1 neighboring pairs), and `best`, also starting at 0, inherits that shortfall. That's why a single-element input — a run of length 1 containing zero pairs — returns 0 instead of 1, and why a run reaching the last index comes back one short (e.g. […]
out 9934 tok (+9438 thinking) latency 150.7 s
GPT-6.1 Terra passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if len(xs) == 0: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The original code counted matching *adjacent pairs* rather than items, so every nonempty run was undercounted by one, including a single-element input. It did update `best` for matches at the last index, but still undercounted those runs. The fix starts each run at length one and updates `best` as the run grows.
out 331 tok (+172 thinking) latency 6.3 s
Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.
GLM-5.3 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on interpretation: - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is the stated topline, though it's on a constant-currency basis. - **growth_pct**: "eleven and change" is extracted as 11 (an approximation, slightly above 11). - **guidance**: null, since formal guidance was explicitly withheld pending the Q4 close.
out 2173 tok (+2045 thinking) latency 35.8 s
GPT-6.1 Terra passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": "Withheld pending the Q4 close" }
out 317 tok (+261 thinking) latency 6.9 s
Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.
GLM-5.3 passed · 129 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Introducing Universal Prompt Caching** We're thrilled to announce prompt caching that works across every major LLM provider. Identical prompts are now cached once at the gateway level, regardless of which model or vendor serves the request downstream. That means up to 90% savings on token costs and dramatically faster responses for repeated queries. How does it work? Our gateway computes a deterministic hash of each incoming prompt, checks the shared cache layer, and returns instant responses when matches exist. New or modified prompts route normally to your configured provider. Deploy with a single configuration flag; no code changes required. Cache invalidation, TTL controls, and detailed analytics are included. Stop paying twice for the same question. Enable Universal Prompt Caching today. --- *Exactly 120 words; one question; no forbidden terms.*
out 5418 tok (+5255 thinking) latency 52.4 s
GPT-6.1 Terra passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Meet Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that stores reusable prompts across providers, helping teams reduce latency and control costs without changing how they build. When a request matches a cached prompt, the gateway retrieves the stored result instead of sending the same work again. Need to route traffic between models or vendors? Prompt Cache works across supported providers, giving your applications a consistent caching layer as your stack evolves. Set expiration policies, monitor cache performance, and choose which requests qualify through familiar gateway controls. Your team can spend less time repeating requests and more time improving the experiences customers rely on. Start using Prompt Cache today and make every request work harder for your application and your budget.
out 579 tok (+440 thinking) latency 9.1 s
Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.
Switch between them with one line
Both ids are in every tab below; the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="glm-5.3",
# model="gpt-6.1-terra", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "glm-5.3",
// model: "gpt-6.1-terra", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "glm-5.3",
# "model": "gpt-6.1-terra", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "glm-5.3",
// Model: "gpt-6.1-terra", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("glm-5.3")
// .model("gpt-6.1-terra") // uncomment this line, comment the one above
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3 or GPT-6.1 Terra?
GPT-6.1 Terra is cheaper on the "Input / 1M tokens" row ($1 vs $1.4, 1.4× apart). Other rows may point the other way; the table above carries the full rate card, and real cost depends on your mix.
Can I A/B test GLM-5.3 against GPT-6.1 Terra without two integrations?
Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key. Switching is a one-line change to the model id, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.
Do GLM-5.3 and GPT-6.1 Terra support prompt caching?
Yes. Both bill cache reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.