Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.5-Air vs Magistral Medium

GLM-4.5-Air is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5-Air Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.9

Rank #177 Confirmed

Magistral Medium Mistral AI

35.2

Rank #227 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5-Air scores higher in 7 categories and Magistral Medium in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.5-Air leads 24.1 to 8.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 43% for GLM-4.5-Air and 16.2% for Magistral Medium.
  • GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.10 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $5 for Magistral Medium.
  • Magistral Medium accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

GLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Mistral AI
Noometry Index38.935.2
Released2025-07-202025-03-17
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K262K
Max output98K16K
Input $ / M tokens$0.20$2
Output $ / M tokens$1.10$5
Results tracked2722

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

Category by category

Coding Magistral Medium leads

GLM-4.5-Air: 33.3 (#259), Magistral Medium: 39.1 (#161)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
LMArena Coding13971319
SciCode—39.2%
GSO2.9%—

Reasoning GLM-4.5-Air leads

GLM-4.5-Air: 24.1 (#166), Magistral Medium: 8.6 (#348)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
Kagi LLM Benchmark43%16.2%
LMArena Hard Prompts13791267
ARC-AGI-2—0%
ARC-AGI-1—6.1%
CritPt—0.3%
ForecastBench59.2—

Math GLM-4.5-Air leads

GLM-4.5-Air: 36.2 (#170), Magistral Medium: 35.1 (#189)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
LMArena Math13961250
Omni-MATH39.1%—

Knowledge GLM-4.5-Air leads

GLM-4.5-Air: 35.0 (#191), Magistral Medium: 33.5 (#202)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
LMArena Expert13701223
Humanity's Last Exam8.1%—
MMLU-Pro76.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.3%—
GPQA (HELM)59.4%—

Multilingual GLM-4.5-Air leads

GLM-4.5-Air: 49.1 (#135), Magistral Medium: 39.6 (#224)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
LMArena Non-English13661232
LMArena Chinese14261227
LMArena French13991267
LMArena German13771248
LMArena Japanese13481175
LMArena Korean13081125
LMArena Russian13731224
LMArena Spanish13861271

Instruction Following GLM-4.5-Air leads

GLM-4.5-Air: 69.6 (#171), Magistral Medium: 66.0 (#211)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
LMArena Instruction Following13541254
IFEval81.2%—

Long Context GLM-4.5-Air leads

GLM-4.5-Air: 41.6 (#135), Magistral Medium: 39.3 (#183)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
LMArena Longer Query13661295

Writing & Preference GLM-4.5-Air leads

GLM-4.5-Air: 55.9 (#139), Magistral Medium: 46.3 (#219)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5-AirMagistral Medium
LMArena Text13841255
LMArena Creative Writing13431245
LMArena Multi-Turn13711275
WildBench78.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5-Air better than Magistral Medium?

GLM-4.5-Air is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5-Air or Magistral Medium?

GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; Magistral Medium lists at $2 and $5.

Is GLM-4.5-Air or Magistral Medium better for coding?

Magistral Medium scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 33.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Magistral Medium does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5-Air and Magistral Medium share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5-Air has 27 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Medium has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper