Model comparison

GLM-4.5 vs Granite 3.1 2b Instruct

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #122 Confirmed

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

33.2

Rank #247 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.5 leads 52.8 to 29.1.

Side by side

GLM-4.5 and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct specifications
GLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)IBM
Noometry Index42.033.2
Released2025-07-27—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output98K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked2712

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Coding14341149
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)54.2%—
WeirdML40.6%—
ALE-Bench344.82—
AlgoTune1.52—

Reasoning GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14291138
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—

Math GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Math14271159

Knowledge GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Expert14331131
Humanity's Last Exam8.3%—
Confabulations11.3%—

Multilingual GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Non-English14171068
LMArena Chinese14651139
LMArena Russian14141063
LMArena French1418—
LMArena German1407—
LMArena Japanese1415—
LMArena Korean1380—
LMArena Spanish1454—

Instruction Following GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14041116

Long Context GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14121155
Fiction.LiveBench58.3%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Granite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Text14301127
LMArena Creative Writing13951116
LMArena Multi-Turn14151099
Short-Story Creative Writing73.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1343—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5 better than Granite 3.1 2b Instruct?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.5 or Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper