Noometry

Model comparison

Command A vs GLM-5

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Command A Cohere

36.5

Rank #215 Confirmed

GLM-5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

46.1

Rank #66 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 1 category and GLM-5 in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-5 leads 49.0 to 27.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 28.8% for Command A and 75% for GLM-5.
  • GLM-5 is cheaper at $1 / $3.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
  • Command A accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 205K.

Side by side

Command AGLM-5
ProviderCohereZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index36.546.1
Released2025-03-132026-02-11
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window256K205K
Max output8K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$1
Output $ / M tokens$10$3.20
Results tracked2445

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5 leads

Command A: 27.2 (#322), GLM-5: 49.0 (#52)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
LMArena Coding13301461
SWE-bench Verified—72.1%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—72.8%
Aider Polyglot12%—
LMArena WebDev—1434
SWE-bench Multilingual—69.7%
WeirdML—48.2%
ALE-Bench—765.62

Agentic & Tool Use Command A leads

Command A: 35.9 (#40), GLM-5: 31.1 (#71)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
Terminal-Bench—52.4%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard57.1%—
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

Command A: 18.3 (#283), GLM-5: 27.6 (#116)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
Kagi LLM Benchmark28.8%75%
LMArena Hard Prompts13261452
ARC-AGI-2—4.9%
SimpleBench—53.2%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
ARC-AGI-1—44.7%
Chess Puzzles—10%
DTBench61.3%—
LMCA10.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—145.83
ForecastBench—61

Math GLM-5 leads

Command A: 36.2 (#171), GLM-5: 46.4 (#71)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
LMArena Math13001440
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

Command A: 37.1 (#159), GLM-5: 52.3 (#64)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.3%10.1%
LMArena Expert12951454
GPQA Diamond—87.8%

Multilingual GLM-5 leads

Command A: 45.3 (#170), GLM-5: 53.7 (#58)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
LMArena Non-English13131430
LMArena Chinese13271511
LMArena French13511455
LMArena German13411445
LMArena Japanese12851416
LMArena Korean12851423
LMArena Russian13141436
LMArena Spanish13471454

Instruction Following GLM-5 leads

Command A: 69.1 (#177), GLM-5: 75.2 (#67)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
LMArena Instruction Following13091428

Long Context GLM-5 leads

Command A: 40.6 (#151), GLM-5: 44.7 (#60)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
LMArena Longer Query13341446
CL-bench—18.7%

Writing & Preference GLM-5 leads

Command A: 47.6 (#208), GLM-5: 66.0 (#38)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-5
LMArena Text13311446
LMArena Creative Writing13191439
EQ-Bench Creative Writing11451601
LMArena Multi-Turn13391456

Frequently asked questions

Is Command A better than GLM-5?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command A or GLM-5?

GLM-5 is cheaper. It lists at $1 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.

Is Command A or GLM-5 better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Command A does, with 256K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Command A and GLM-5 share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5 has 45.

Related comparisons

Go deeper