Noometry

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GLM-4.6V

DeepSeek V4 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.6 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4 Flash DeepSeek

53.6

Rank #35 Confirmed

GLM-4.6V Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.3

Rank #137 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Flash scores higher in 7 categories and GLM-4.6V in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Flash leads 53.7 to 27.6.
  • DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.
  • DeepSeek V4 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
ProviderDeepSeekZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index53.641.3
Released2026-04-242025-12-08
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output393K33K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$0.60$0.90
Results tracked4112

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 47.9 (#59), GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
LMArena Coding14571390
FrontierCode18.8%—
LMArena WebDev1582—
SciCode49.9%—
WeirdML63%—
ALE-Bench1,306—

Reasoning DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 53.7 (#30), GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
LMArena Hard Prompts14441368
ARC-AGI-261.4%—
SimpleBench61.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)89.6%—
ARC-AGI-189%—
CritPt16.6%—
Chess Puzzles33%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench90.9%—
LMCA41.7%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.49—

Math Not comparable

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 60.3 (#37), GLM-4.6V: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)57.5%—
FrontierMath Tier 424.4%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions76.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%—
ProofBench56%—
LMArena Math1427—

Knowledge DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 55.4 (#48), GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
LMArena Expert14411371
GPQA Diamond91%—
SimpleQA Verified33.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek V4 Flash: —, GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
LMArena Vision—1164

Multilingual DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 53.0 (#72), GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
LMArena Non-English14201359
LMArena Chinese14681425
LMArena Russian14281340
LMArena French1439—
LMArena German1418—
LMArena Japanese1406—
LMArena Korean1384—
LMArena Spanish1436—

Instruction Following DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 74.9 (#81), GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
LMArena Instruction Following14211352

Long Context DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 43.8 (#85), GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
LMArena Longer Query14341358

Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 63.8 (#61), GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGLM-4.6V
LMArena Text14321377
LMArena Creative Writing14031347
LMArena Multi-Turn14491360
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1559—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4 Flash better than GLM-4.6V?

DeepSeek V4 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.6 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GLM-4.6V?

DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.

Is DeepSeek V4 Flash or GLM-4.6V better for coding?

DeepSeek V4 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.9 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Flash and GLM-4.6V share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Flash has 41 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper