Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #122 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 35.9.
  • Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.5.
  • Qwen3.7 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • GLM-4.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.045.3
Released2025-07-272026-06-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window131K1M
Max output98K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$1.60
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), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding14341473
FrontierCode—10.2%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)54.2%—
SciCode—45.5%
WeirdML40.6%—
ALE-Bench344.82—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.5: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts14291460
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84%
LMCA—37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.37

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math14271466
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Expert14331467
GPQA Diamond—87.9%
Humanity's Last Exam8.3%—
Confabulations11.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.5: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English14171445
LMArena Chinese14651510
LMArena French14181473
LMArena German14071471
LMArena Japanese14151413
LMArena Korean13801415
LMArena Russian14141457
LMArena Spanish14541457

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following14041440

Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query14121455
Fiction.LiveBench58.3%—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text14301455
LMArena Creative Writing13951439
LMArena Multi-Turn14151460
Short-Story Creative Writing73.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1343—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5 better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Is GLM-4.5 or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper