Model comparison
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B vs GLM-4.6V
GLM-4.6V has enough public results to be ranked (#133); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.6V leads 40.2 to 30.7.
Side by side
| DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 34.5 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2025-12-08 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.90 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6V leads
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 30.7 (#282), GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 22.8% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1390 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 29.6% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 60.4% | — |
| MBPP+ | 54.8% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1368 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 62.18 | — |
| WinoGrande | 53.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, GLM-4.6V: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| GSM8K | 4.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1372 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 25.4% | — |
| MMLU | 25.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1426 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1341 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1351 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1359 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better than GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V has enough public results to be ranked (#133); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B or GLM-4.6V better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and GLM-4.6V share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.