Model comparison
GLM-4.5V vs Mercury 2.5
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.5V leads 37.4 to 23.3.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $1.80 for GLM-4.5V.
- Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 64K.
- GLM-4.5V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 39.8 | 33.5 |
| Released | 2025-08-11 | 2026-09-08 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 64K | 260K |
| Max output | 16K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.04 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.80 | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 15 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155), Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 38.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 301.65 |
Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119), Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 59.8% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1334 | — |
Math GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159), Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| LMArena Math | 1354 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1353 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1154 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1303 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1298 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1336 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1311 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1304 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1333 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1295 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1332 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5V better than Mercury 2.5?
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5V or Mercury 2.5?
Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5V lists at $0.60 and $1.80.
Is GLM-4.5V or Mercury 2.5 better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (39.5 vs 39.5); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 64K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and Mercury 2.5 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 4.