Noometry

Model comparison

Dolly 2.0-12b vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Dolly 2.0-12b Databricks

24.9

Rank #339 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

50.9

Rank #38 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Dolly 2.0-12b scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.2 leads 70.7 to 15.3.

Side by side

Dolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
ProviderDatabricksZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index24.950.9
Released2023-04-112026-06-13
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked1750

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 23.0 (#327), GLM-5.2: 50.9 (#37)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
LMArena Coding7761484
SWE-bench Verified—78.7%
DeepSWE—43.8%
FrontierCode—24.5%
LMArena WebDev—1604
SciCode—50.5%
WeirdML—70.1%
ALE-Bench—1,047

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Dolly 2.0-12b: —, GLM-5.2: 31.6 (#63)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
τ²-bench Banking—37.1%
PostTrainBench—31.7%
GBAEval—0%
Vending-Bench 2—8,314

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 14.6 (#315), GLM-5.2: 42.1 (#46)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
LMArena Hard Prompts8041480
Epoch Capabilities Index88.94151.76
ARC-AGI-2—22.8%
SimpleBench—58.8%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—62.6%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.3%
ARC-AGI-1—77%
CritPt—20.9%
Chess Puzzles—21%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—93.6%
LMCA—45.8%
Surface Evolver Bench—55.6%
HellaSwag70.8%—
PIQA75.4%—
WinoGrande61.8%—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 25.0 (#250), GLM-5.2: 55.4 (#35)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
LMArena Math8711482
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—59.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4—29.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—67.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.4%
ProofBench—35%

Knowledge Not comparable

Dolly 2.0-12b: —, GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#36)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
GPQA Diamond—91.9%
SimpleQA Verified—34.2%
LMArena Expert—1484
ARC (AI2) Challenge39.6%—
BoolQ56.3%—
MMLU26.2%—
OpenBookQA39.2%—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 17.4 (#291), GLM-5.2: 56.0 (#25)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English8361459
LMArena Chinese8361518
LMArena French—1476
LMArena German—1470
LMArena Japanese—1451
LMArena Korean—1445
LMArena Russian—1467
LMArena Spanish—1477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 38.9 (#299), GLM-5.2: 77.1 (#32)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following8141465

Long Context Not comparable

Dolly 2.0-12b: —, GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query—1479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 15.3 (#306), GLM-5.2: 70.7 (#20)

BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bGLM-5.2
LMArena Text8511470
LMArena Creative Writing8641465
LMArena Multi-Turn7401468
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1757
EQ-Bench 4—1222

Frequently asked questions

Is Dolly 2.0-12b better than GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Dolly 2.0-12b or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.9 versus 23.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Dolly 2.0-12b and GLM-5.2 share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Dolly 2.0-12b has 17 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 50.

Related comparisons

Go deeper