Model comparison

GLM-4.5V vs Llama 2-70B

GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5V Z.ai (Zhipu)

39.8

Rank #158 Confirmed

Llama 2-70B Meta

24.4

Rank #349 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5V scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-70B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.5V leads 37.5 to 7.4.

Side by side

GLM-4.5V and Llama 2-70B specifications
GLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index39.824.4
Released2025-08-112023-07-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window64K—
Max output16K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$1.80—
Results tracked1535

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155), Llama 2-70B: 31.4 (#286)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Coding13471079

Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119), Llama 2-70B: 14.4 (#325)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Hard Prompts13341073
Kagi LLM Benchmark59.8%—
DTBench—41.6%
BIG-Bench Hard—64.9%
CommonsenseQA 2.0—50%
Epoch Capabilities Index—113.79
ForecastBench—51.4
HellaSwag—85.3%
LAMBADA—78.9%
PIQA—82.8%
WinoGrande—80.2%

Math GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159), Llama 2-70B: 8.1 (#326)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Math13541091
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—0%
MATH Level 5—3.3%
GSM8K—69.6%

Knowledge GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156), Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#310)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Expert13531039
GPQA Diamond—26.3%
ARC (AI2) Challenge—78.3%
BoolQ—88.6%
MMLU—69.9%
OpenBookQA—60.2%
TriviaQA—87.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92), Llama 2-70B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Vision1154—

Multilingual GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177), Llama 2-70B: 27.7 (#274)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Non-English13031045
LMArena Chinese1337995
LMArena Russian12981083
LMArena Spanish13361143
LMArena French—1090
LMArena German—1041
LMArena Japanese—927
LMArena Korean—964

Instruction Following GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175), Llama 2-70B: 54.9 (#278)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Instruction Following13111071

Long Context GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171), Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#270)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Longer Query13041062

Writing & Preference GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170), Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#279)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VLlama 2-70B
LMArena Text13331115
LMArena Creative Writing12951075
LMArena Multi-Turn13321088

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5V better than Llama 2-70B?

GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.5V or Llama 2-70B better for coding?

GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and Llama 2-70B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-70B has 35.

Related comparisons

Go deeper