Model comparison
Dolly 2.0-12b vs GLM-4.6V
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
DatabricksSummary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Dolly 2.0-12b scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.6V in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.6V leads 56.8 to 15.3.
Side by side
| Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Databricks | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2023-04-11 | 2025-12-08 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.90 |
| Results tracked | 17 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6V leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 23.0 (#327), GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 776 | 1390 |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 14.6 (#315), GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 804 | 1368 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 88.94 | — |
| HellaSwag | 70.8% | — |
| PIQA | 75.4% | — |
| WinoGrande | 61.8% | — |
Math Not comparable
Dolly 2.0-12b: 25.0 (#250), GLM-4.6V: —
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 871 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Dolly 2.0-12b: —, GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1372 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 39.6% | — |
| BoolQ | 56.3% | — |
| MMLU | 26.2% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 39.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Dolly 2.0-12b: —, GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 17.4 (#291), GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 836 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 836 | 1426 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1341 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 38.9 (#299), GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 814 | 1351 |
Long Context Not comparable
Dolly 2.0-12b: —, GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1358 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
Dolly 2.0-12b: 15.3 (#306), GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)
| Benchmark | Dolly 2.0-12b | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 851 | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 864 | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 740 | 1359 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Dolly 2.0-12b better than GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Dolly 2.0-12b or GLM-4.6V better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 23.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Dolly 2.0-12b and GLM-4.6V share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Dolly 2.0-12b has 17 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.