Model comparison

Falcon-180B vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 7 shared benchmarks.

Falcon-180B

Technology Innovation Institute

32.2

Rank #260 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Falcon-180B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.2 leads 70.4 to 29.1.

Side by side

Falcon-180B and GLM-5.2 specifications
	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
Provider	Technology Innovation Institute	Z.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index	32.2	51.1
Released	2023-09-06	2026-06-13
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	—	1M
Max output	—	131K
Input $ / M tokens	—	$1.40
Output $ / M tokens	—	$4.40
Results tracked	16	51

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
SWE-bench Verified	—	78.7%
DeepSWE	—	43.8%
FrontierCode	—	24.5%
LMArena WebDev	—	1603
SciCode	—	50.5%
WeirdML	—	70.1%
LMArena Coding	—	1485
ALE-Bench	—	1,047

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
APEX-Agents	—	45.2%
τ²-bench Banking	—	37.1%
PostTrainBench	—	31.7%
GBAEval	—	0%
Vending-Bench 2	—	8,314

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

Falcon-180B: 19.1 (#269), GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
LMArena Hard Prompts	1007	1480
Epoch Capabilities Index	112.13	151.78
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%
HellaSwag	89%	—
LAMBADA	79.8%	—
PIQA	84.9%	—
WinoGrande	87.1%	—

Math Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
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%
LMArena Math	—	1482
GSM8K	54.4%	—

Knowledge Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
GPQA Diamond	—	91.9%
SimpleQA Verified	—	34.2%
LMArena Expert	—	1486
ARC (AI2) Challenge	67.8%	—
BoolQ	89%	—
MMLU	70.6%	—
OpenBookQA	64.2%	—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

Falcon-180B: 25.2 (#286), GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English	1000	1459
LMArena Chinese	—	1519
LMArena French	—	1479
LMArena German	—	1468
LMArena Japanese	—	1451
LMArena Korean	—	1445
LMArena Russian	—	1466
LMArena Spanish	—	1477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Falcon-180B: 53.4 (#286), GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following	1047	1465

Long Context Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query	—	1479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Falcon-180B: 29.1 (#295), GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Falcon-180B	GLM-5.2
LMArena Text	1054	1470
LMArena Creative Writing	1089	1462
LMArena Multi-Turn	1013	1469
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	1757
EQ-Bench 4	—	1222

Frequently asked questions

Is Falcon-180B better than GLM-5.2?