Model comparison

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) vs GLM-5

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) DeepSeek

37.6

Rank #200 Confirmed

GLM-5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

46.1

Rank #66 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5 leads 52.3 to 34.8.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) and GLM-5 specifications
DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
ProviderDeepSeekZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index37.646.1
Released2024-09-062026-02-11
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—205K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1
Output $ / M tokens—$3.20
Results tracked2245

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 31.7 (#281), GLM-5: 49.0 (#52)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
LMArena Coding13091461
SWE-bench Verified—72.1%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—72.8%
Aider Polyglot17.8%—
LMArena WebDev—1434
SWE-bench Multilingual—69.7%
WeirdML—48.2%
BigCodeBench Instruct48.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete53.2%—
ALE-Bench—765.62
HumanEval+83.5%—
MBPP+74.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): —, GLM-5: 31.1 (#71)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
Terminal-Bench—52.4%
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

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 25.6 (#145), GLM-5: 27.6 (#116)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
LMArena Hard Prompts12891452
ARC-AGI-2—4.9%
SimpleBench—53.2%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—75%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
ARC-AGI-1—44.7%
Chess Puzzles—10%
Epoch Capabilities Index—145.83
ForecastBench—61

Math GLM-5 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 35.9 (#177), GLM-5: 46.4 (#71)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
LMArena Math12881440
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

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 34.8 (#193), GLM-5: 52.3 (#64)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
LMArena Expert12661454
GPQA Diamond—87.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.1%

Multilingual GLM-5 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 42.5 (#193), GLM-5: 53.7 (#58)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
LMArena Non-English12731430
LMArena Chinese13181511
LMArena French12891455
LMArena German12581445
LMArena Japanese12281416
LMArena Korean12091423
LMArena Russian12891436
LMArena Spanish12481454

Instruction Following GLM-5 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 67.5 (#194), GLM-5: 75.2 (#67)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
LMArena Instruction Following12801428

Long Context GLM-5 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 39.5 (#174), GLM-5: 44.7 (#60)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
LMArena Longer Query13011446
CL-bench—18.7%

Writing & Preference GLM-5 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 49.8 (#187), GLM-5: 66.0 (#38)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5
LMArena Text12941446
LMArena Creative Writing12851439
LMArena Multi-Turn12971456
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1601

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) better than GLM-5?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) or GLM-5 better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) and GLM-5 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) has 22 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5 has 45.

Related comparisons

Go deeper