Model comparison

GLM-4.5V vs Mistral Small 3.2

GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.2 costs 6.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 11, 2026. 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5V Z.ai (Zhipu)

39.8

Rank #158 Confirmed

Mistral Small 3.2

Mistral AI

31.2

Rank #280 Confirmed

Summary

They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-4.5V scores higher in 4 categories and Mistral Small 3.2 in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.5V leads 37.4 to 26.3.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 59.8% for GLM-4.5V and 40.4% for Mistral Small 3.2.
Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.0938 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $1.80 for GLM-4.5V.
Mistral Small 3.2 accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 64K.

Side by side

GLM-4.5V and Mistral Small 3.2 specifications
	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
Provider	Z.ai (Zhipu)	Mistral AI
Noometry Index	39.8	31.2
Released	2025-08-11	2025-06-20
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	64K	256K
Max output	16K	16K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.60	$0.0938
Output $ / M tokens	$1.80	$0.25
Results tracked	15	6

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Coding	1347	—

Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119), Mistral Small 3.2: 18.1 (#287)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
Kagi LLM Benchmark	59.8%	40.4%
Chess Puzzles	—	1%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1334	—
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	131.74

Math GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159), Mistral Small 3.2: 26.3 (#260)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	30.3%
LMArena Math	1354	—

Knowledge GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156), Mistral Small 3.2: 26.7 (#256)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
GPQA Diamond	—	49.1%
LMArena Expert	1353	—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Vision	1154	—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Non-English	1303	—
LMArena Chinese	1337	—
LMArena Russian	1298	—
LMArena Spanish	1336	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Instruction Following	1311	—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Longer Query	1304	—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170), Mistral Small 3.2: 45.0 (#224)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.5V	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Text	1333	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1295	—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	1255
LMArena Multi-Turn	1332	—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5V better than Mistral Small 3.2?

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5V or Mistral Small 3.2?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0938 per million input tokens and $0.25 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5V lists at $0.60 and $1.80.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Small 3.2 does, with 256K tokens against 64K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and Mistral Small 3.2 share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Small 3.2 has 6.