Model comparison
GLM-4.5-Air vs QwQ-32B
GLM-4.5-Air and QwQ-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.9 vs 39.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5-Air scores higher in 3 categories and QwQ-32B in 5 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where QwQ-32B leads 49.0 to 41.6.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.9 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2025-07-20 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 98K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.10 | — |
| Results tracked | 27 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding QwQ-32B leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 33.3 (#259), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1397 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| GSO | 2.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
Reasoning Too close to call
GLM-4.5-Air: 24.1 (#166), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1379 | 1325 |
| ForecastBench | 59.2 | 58.3 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 43% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math QwQ-32B leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 36.2 (#170), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| Omni-MATH | 39.1% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge QwQ-32B leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 35.0 (#191), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1370 | 1324 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 76.2% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 59.4% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.5-Air leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 49.1 (#135), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1366 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1399 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1377 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1348 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1386 | 1354 |
Instruction Following QwQ-32B leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 69.6 (#171), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1354 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
| IFEval | 81.2% | — |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 41.6 (#135), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1366 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.5-Air leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 55.9 (#139), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1384 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1343 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1371 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| WildBench | 78.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5-Air better than QwQ-32B?
GLM-4.5-Air and QwQ-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.9 vs 39.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is GLM-4.5-Air or QwQ-32B better for coding?
QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.4 versus 33.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5-Air and QwQ-32B share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5-Air has 27 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.