Model comparison
GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.4 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5-Air costs 8.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5-Air scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.3 to 33.8.
- GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.10 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- GLM-4.5-Air has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.7 | 51.4 |
| Released | 2025-07-20 | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 1M |
| Max output | 98K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.10 | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 27 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 34.5 (#225), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.2 (#43)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1397 | 1498 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1515 |
| SciCode | — | 48.8% |
| GSO | 2.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,189 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.5-Air: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 21.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 23.3 (#166), Qwen3.7 Max: 48.4 (#36)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1379 | 1483 |
| SimpleBench | — | 70.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 43% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.1% |
| CritPt | — | 13.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| DTBench | — | 92.3% |
| LMCA | — | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 153.74 |
| ForecastBench | 59.2 | — |
Math Qwen3.7 Max leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 33.8 (#166), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.3 (#26)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1488 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
| Omni-MATH | 39.1% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 34.6 (#184), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.7 (#24)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1370 | 1488 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.1% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 76.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 59.4% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 49.4 (#130), Qwen3.7 Max: 57.1 (#13)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1366 | 1475 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1533 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1482 |
| LMArena French | 1399 | — |
| LMArena German | 1376 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1348 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1385 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 69.8 (#165), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.9 (#34)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1353 | 1460 |
| IFEval | 81.2% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 41.6 (#130), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#34)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1367 | 1484 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 56.1 (#134), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.2 (#52)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1384 | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1343 | 1450 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1371 | 1482 |
| WildBench | 78.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5-Air better than Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.4 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5-Air costs 8.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5-Air or Qwen3.7 Max?
GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.
Is GLM-4.5-Air or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.2 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.7 Max does, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5-Air and Qwen3.7 Max share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5-Air has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.