Model comparison
GLM-4.5V vs OLMo 2 Furious 13B
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.5V leads 36.8 to 18.0.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 39.2 | 29.2 |
| Released | 2025-08-11 | 2024-12-31 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 64K | — |
| Max output | 16K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.80 | — |
| Results tracked | 15 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 38.9 (#152), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 28.1 (#309)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | — | 10.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 26.5 (#118), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 14.8 (#312)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 59.8% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 16.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1335 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 20.6% |
| LiveBench | — | 22.1% |
Math GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 34.7 (#157), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 21.3 (#270)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | — | 15.6% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 13.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1353 | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 36.8 (#155), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 18.0 (#278)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | — | 31% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 31.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1353 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 33.6 (#86), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1154 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 44.9 (#172), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1304 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1338 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1299 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1335 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 69.4 (#170), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 61.1 (#243)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 60.6% |
| IFEval | — | 73% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1311 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#166), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1305 | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 52.7 (#162), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 43.0 (#226)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | OLMo 2 Furious 13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1333 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1295 | — |
| WildBench | — | 68.9% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1333 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 11.2% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5V better than OLMo 2 Furious 13B?
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.5V or OLMo 2 Furious 13B better for coding?
GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 28.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and OLMo 2 Furious 13B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and OLMo 2 Furious 13B has 12.