Model comparison
Falcon-180B vs GLM-4.6V
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 31.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Technology Innovation InstituteSummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Falcon-180B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.6V in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.6V leads 56.8 to 29.3.
Side by side
| Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Technology Innovation Institute | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 31.8 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2023-09-06 | 2025-12-08 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.90 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | — | 1390 |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
Falcon-180B: 18.3 (#266), GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1007 | 1368 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 111.89 | — |
| HellaSwag | 89% | — |
| LAMBADA | 79.8% | — |
| PIQA | 84.9% | — |
| WinoGrande | 87.1% | — |
Math Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.6V: —
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| GSM8K | 54.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1372 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 67.8% | — |
| BoolQ | 89% | — |
| MMLU | 70.6% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 64.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
Falcon-180B: 25.3 (#281), GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1000 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1426 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1341 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
Falcon-180B: 53.6 (#281), GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1047 | 1351 |
Long Context Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1358 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
Falcon-180B: 29.3 (#290), GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1054 | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1089 | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1013 | 1359 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Falcon-180B better than GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 31.8 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Falcon-180B and GLM-4.6V share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Falcon-180B has 16 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.