Model comparison

GLM-4.5 vs Qwen3 8B

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 33.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 8B costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #125 Confirmed

Qwen3 8B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.3

Rank #237 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3 8B in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.5 leads 27.7 to 16.1.
  • Qwen3 8B is cheaper at $0.18 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.5.

Side by side

GLM-4.5 and Qwen3 8B specifications
GLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.433.3
Released2025-07-272025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K131K
Max output98K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$0.70
Results tracked2711

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 41.1 (#121), Qwen3 8B: 33.4 (#245)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)54.2%—
SciCode—22.6%
WeirdML40.6%—
LMArena Coding1434—
ALE-Bench344.82—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.5: —, Qwen3 8B: 29.9 (#71)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—42.6%

Reasoning GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 27.7 (#99), Qwen3 8B: 16.1 (#299)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles—5%
LMArena Hard Prompts1430—
DTBench—59.7%
LMCA—8.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index—136.17

Math GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 36.3 (#119), Qwen3 8B: 33.3 (#176)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—56.1%
LMArena Math1427—

Knowledge Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 35.5 (#172), Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#164)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
GPQA Diamond—56.8%
Humanity's Last Exam8.3%—
Confabulations11.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—4.8%
LMArena Expert1433—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.5: 53.0 (#74), Qwen3 8B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
LMArena Non-English1417—
LMArena Chinese1465—
LMArena French1423—
LMArena German1406—
LMArena Japanese1416—
LMArena Korean1382—
LMArena Russian1414—
LMArena Spanish1454—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.5: 74.3 (#100), Qwen3 8B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
LMArena Instruction Following1405—

Long Context Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#196), Qwen3 8B: 37.8 (#205)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
Fiction.LiveBench58.3%62.1%
LMArena Longer Query1413—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.5: 57.7 (#121), Qwen3 8B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3 8B
LMArena Text1430—
LMArena Creative Writing1395—
Short-Story Creative Writing73.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1343—
LMArena Multi-Turn1415—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5 better than Qwen3 8B?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 33.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 8B costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5 or Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Is GLM-4.5 or Qwen3 8B better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.1 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 131K tokens.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Qwen3 8B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper