Model comparison

GLM-4.5 vs Olmo 3 32b Think

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #122 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.5 leads 52.8 to 41.2.

Side by side

GLM-4.5 and Olmo 3 32b Think specifications
GLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index42.038.7
Released2025-07-27—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output98K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked2714

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), Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Coding14341319
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), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts14291302
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—

Math GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Math14271316

Knowledge Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Expert14331273
Humanity's Last Exam8.3%—
Confabulations11.3%—

Multilingual GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Non-English14171255
LMArena Chinese14651300
LMArena French14181291
LMArena German14071290
LMArena Russian14141254
LMArena Japanese1415—
LMArena Korean1380—
LMArena Spanish1454—

Instruction Following GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following14041275

Long Context Olmo 3 32b Think leads

GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query14121296
Fiction.LiveBench58.3%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Olmo 3 32b Think
LMArena Text14301300
LMArena Creative Writing13951256
LMArena Multi-Turn14151290
Short-Story Creative Writing73.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1343—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5 better than Olmo 3 32b Think?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.5 or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 38.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Olmo 3 32b Think share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper