Model comparison

GLM-4.5 vs Llama 2-13B

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #122 Confirmed

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.6

Rank #309 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.5 leads 57.5 to 29.8.

Side by side

GLM-4.5 and Llama 2-13B specifications
GLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index42.029.6
Released2025-07-272023-07-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output98K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked2732

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), Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
LMArena Coding14341062
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), Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
LMArena Hard Prompts14291051
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
DTBench—42.2%
BIG-Bench Hard—58.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—106.17
HellaSwag—80.7%
LAMBADA—76.5%
PIQA—80.8%
WinoGrande—72.8%

Math GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
LMArena Math14271065
GSM8K—36.9%

Knowledge GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
LMArena Expert14331030
Humanity's Last Exam8.3%—
Confabulations11.3%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.3%
BoolQ—82.4%
MMLU—55.6%
OpenBookQA—57%
TriviaQA—79.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.5: —, Llama 2-13B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
ScienceQA—55.8%

Multilingual GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
LMArena Non-English14171024
LMArena Chinese14651001
LMArena French14181044
LMArena German14071009
LMArena Japanese1415894
LMArena Korean1380953
LMArena Russian14141055
LMArena Spanish14541087

Instruction Following GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
LMArena Instruction Following14041045

Long Context GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
LMArena Longer Query14121064
Fiction.LiveBench58.3%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Llama 2-13B
LMArena Text14301084
LMArena Creative Writing13951047
LMArena Multi-Turn14151050
Short-Story Creative Writing73.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1343—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5 better than Llama 2-13B?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.5 or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Llama 2-13B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper