Noometry

Model comparison

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b vs GLM-5

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b Cohere

35.9

Rank #221 Confirmed

GLM-5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

46.1

Rank #66 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. C4ai Aya Expanse 32b scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5 leads 66.0 to 42.2.
  • GLM-5 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

C4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
ProviderCohereZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index35.946.1
Released2024-10-242026-02-11
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K205K
Max output4K131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1
Output $ / M tokens—$3.20
Results tracked1845

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-5 leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 34.8 (#231), GLM-5: 49.0 (#52)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
LMArena Coding11971461
SWE-bench Verified—72.1%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—72.8%
LMArena WebDev—1434
SWE-bench Multilingual—69.7%
WeirdML—48.2%
ALE-Bench—765.62

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: —, GLM-5: 31.1 (#71)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
Terminal-Bench—52.4%
τ²-bench Airline—82.5%
τ²-bench Banking—9.8%
τ²-bench Retail—73.7%
τ²-bench Telecom—86.8%
Vending-Bench 2—4,432

Reasoning GLM-5 leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 23.3 (#180), GLM-5: 27.6 (#116)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
LMArena Hard Prompts11931452
ARC-AGI-2—4.9%
SimpleBench—53.2%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—75%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
ARC-AGI-1—44.7%
Chess Puzzles—10%
Epoch Capabilities Index—145.83
ForecastBench—61

Math GLM-5 leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 34.0 (#197), GLM-5: 46.4 (#71)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
LMArena Math12001440
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—65.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—80%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—16.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—2.1%

Knowledge GLM-5 leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 33.2 (#206), GLM-5: 52.3 (#64)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%10.1%
LMArena Expert11821454
GPQA Diamond—87.8%

Multilingual GLM-5 leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 38.4 (#230), GLM-5: 53.7 (#58)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
LMArena Non-English12131430
LMArena Chinese12111511
LMArena French12481455
LMArena German11991445
LMArena Japanese11631416
LMArena Korean11581423
LMArena Russian12271436
LMArena Spanish11931454

Instruction Following GLM-5 leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 62.6 (#237), GLM-5: 75.2 (#67)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
LMArena Instruction Following11961428

Long Context GLM-5 leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 37.2 (#220), GLM-5: 44.7 (#60)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
LMArena Longer Query12281446
CL-bench—18.7%

Writing & Preference GLM-5 leads

C4ai Aya Expanse 32b: 42.2 (#235), GLM-5: 66.0 (#38)

BenchmarkC4ai Aya Expanse 32bGLM-5
LMArena Text12241446
LMArena Creative Writing12001439
LMArena Multi-Turn11901456
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1601

Frequently asked questions

Is C4ai Aya Expanse 32b better than GLM-5?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is C4ai Aya Expanse 32b or GLM-5 better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 34.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5 does, with 205K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do C4ai Aya Expanse 32b and GLM-5 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. C4ai Aya Expanse 32b has 18 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5 has 45.

Related comparisons

Go deeper