Model comparison
DBRX vs GLM-4.5V
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
DatabricksSummary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. DBRX scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.5V in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.5V leads 37.5 to 14.9.
Side by side
| DBRX | GLM-4.5V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Databricks | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 29.4 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2024-03-27 | 2025-08-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 64K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.80 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.5V leads
DBRX: 32.9 (#266), GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1132 | 1347 |
| HumanEval+ | 70.1% | — |
| MBPP+ | 55.8% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads
DBRX: 21.4 (#222), GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | 1334 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 59.8% |
Math GLM-4.5V leads
DBRX: 24.3 (#269), GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1145 | 1354 |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.5V leads
DBRX: 14.9 (#294), GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1076 | 1353 |
| GPQA Diamond | 32.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
DBRX: —, GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1154 |
Multilingual GLM-4.5V leads
DBRX: 29.3 (#268), GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1071 | 1303 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1068 | 1337 |
| LMArena Russian | 1078 | 1298 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1064 | 1336 |
| LMArena French | 1096 | — |
| LMArena German | 1057 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 990 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 993 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-4.5V leads
DBRX: 57.5 (#270), GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1112 | 1311 |
Long Context GLM-4.5V leads
DBRX: 33.7 (#258), GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1112 | 1304 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.5V leads
DBRX: 33.6 (#275), GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1119 | 1333 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1104 | 1295 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1111 | 1332 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DBRX better than GLM-4.5V?
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is DBRX or GLM-4.5V better for coding?
GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 32.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DBRX and GLM-4.5V share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. DBRX has 21 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5V has 15.