Model comparison
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B vs GLM-4.6
GLM-4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#132); DeepSeek Coder 6.7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.6 leads 39.9 to 35.2.
Side by side
| DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 37.1 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2025-09-30 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6 leads
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: 35.2 (#216), GLM-4.6: 39.9 (#137)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 55.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1339 |
| SciCode | — | 38.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 35.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1449 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 43.8% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 340.82 |
| HumanEval+ | 71.3% | — |
| MBPP+ | 65.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, GLM-4.6: 32.1 (#60)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 24.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 72.4% |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, GLM-4.6: 23.1 (#168)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 47.4% |
| CritPt | — | 1.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1440 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 88.88 | — |
| WinoGrande | 57.6% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, GLM-4.6: 36.4 (#115)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1431 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 3.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
| GSM8K | 21.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, GLM-4.6: 39.6 (#118)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.5% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1432 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 36.4% | — |
| MMLU | 36.4% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, GLM-4.6: 53.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1500 |
| LMArena French | — | 1459 |
| LMArena German | — | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1394 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1401 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1418 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1436 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, GLM-4.6: 74.5 (#93)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1410 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#91)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1423 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 6.7B: —, GLM-4.6: 61.3 (#86)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 6.7B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1440 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1411 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1427 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek Coder 6.7B better than GLM-4.6?
GLM-4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#132); DeepSeek Coder 6.7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is DeepSeek Coder 6.7B or GLM-4.6 better for coding?
GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 35.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 6.7B and GLM-4.6 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 6.7B has 9 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.