DeepSeek R1 0528
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.1
Compare DeepSeek R1 0528 by DeepSeek against Z.ai: GLM 5.1 by Z-ai, context windows of 164K vs 203K, tested across 53 shared challenges. Updated April 2026.
Which is better, DeepSeek R1 0528 or Z.ai: GLM 5.1?
DeepSeek R1 0528 and Z.ai: GLM 5.1 are both competitive models. DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0/M input tokens vs $1.4/M for Z.ai: GLM 5.1. Context windows: 164K vs 203K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.
Key Differences Between DeepSeek R1 0528 and Z.ai: GLM 5.1
DeepSeek R1 0528 is made by deepseek while Z.ai: GLM 5.1 is from z-ai. DeepSeek R1 0528 has a 164K token context window compared to Z.ai: GLM 5.1's 203K. On pricing, DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0/M input tokens vs $1.4/M for Z.ai: GLM 5.1.
Our Verdict
DeepSeek R1 0528
Z.ai: GLM 5.1Runner-up
No community votes yet. On paper, DeepSeek R1 0528 has the edge — bigger model tier, major provider backing.
Too close to call
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
85%
Z.ai: GLM 5.1 uses 10.6x more transitions
DeepSeek R1 0528
Z.ai: GLM 5.1
64%Vocabulary54%
10wSentence Length18w
0.30Hedging0.31
6.8Bold3.6
4.9Lists2.6
0.00Emoji0.00
0.40Headings0.43
0.00Transitions0.11
Based on 4 + 27 text responses
vsAsk them anything yourself
279 AI models invented the same fake scientist.
We read every word. 250 models. 2.14 million words. This is what we found.
Free preview13 of 58 slides
FAQ