Model comparison

Codellama 70b Instruct vs GLM-5.1

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Codellama 70b Instruct Meta

33.7

Rank #237 Confirmed

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.8

Rank #59 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 70b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.1 in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.1 leads 66.9 to 33.4.

Side by side

Codellama 70b Instruct and GLM-5.1 specifications
Codellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
ProviderMetaZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index33.747.8
Released—2026-04-07
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—200K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked741

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.1 leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 37.6 (#193), GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
SWE-bench Verified—74.2%
LMArena WebDev—1508
SciCode—43.8%
WeirdML—57.1%
BigCodeBench Instruct40.7%—
LMArena Coding—1485
BigCodeBench Complete49.6%—
ALE-Bench—887.1
HumanEval+65.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
APEX-Agents—40.9%
ExploitBench—18.1%
GBAEval—0%
Vending-Bench 2—5,634

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 20.1 (#242), GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
LMArena Hard Prompts10521472
SimpleBench—55.1%
NYT Connections (extended)—77.7%
CritPt—4.6%
Chess Puzzles—19%
Thematic Generalization—69.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index—149.84

Math Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—36.8%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—67.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%
ProofBench—22.2%
LMArena Math—1473
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—33.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—12.5%

Knowledge Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
GPQA Diamond—89.9%
SimpleQA Verified—34%
LMArena Expert—1476

Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 24.8 (#288), GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
LMArena Non-English9921447
LMArena Chinese—1515
LMArena French—1474
LMArena German—1465
LMArena Japanese—1434
LMArena Korean—1418
LMArena Russian—1454
LMArena Spanish—1469

Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 51.9 (#293), GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
LMArena Instruction Following10241451

Long Context Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
LMArena Longer Query—1466

Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 33.4 (#277), GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.1
LMArena Text10571461
LMArena Creative Writing—1453
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1592
LMArena Multi-Turn—1472

Frequently asked questions

Is Codellama 70b Instruct better than GLM-5.1?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Codellama 70b Instruct or GLM-5.1 better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 37.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Codellama 70b Instruct and GLM-5.1 share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 70b Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.

Related comparisons

Go deeper