Model comparison
GLM-4.5 vs Qwen2.5-Max
GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.5 leads 52.8 to 48.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Confabulations: 11.3% for GLM-4.5 and 21.8% for Qwen2.5-Max.
- GLM-4.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.0 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2025-07-27 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 98K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 27 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1434 | 1359 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 54.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 344.82 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.52 | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.5 leads
GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1429 | 1360 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math GLM-4.5 leads
GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1427 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge Too close to call
GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | 11.3% | 21.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1433 | 1337 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.3% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.5 leads
GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1418 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1407 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1415 | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1414 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1454 | 1377 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.5 leads
GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads
GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1412 | 1358 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 58.3% | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.5 leads
GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1430 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1395 | 1339 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.4% | 72.9% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1415 | 1364 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1343 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5 better than Qwen2.5-Max?
GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.5 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (41.4 vs 41.8); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Qwen2.5-Max share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.