Model comparison
GLM-4.5V vs Qwen3-1.7B
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.5V leads 37.4 to 16.3.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.8 | 26.6 |
| Released | 2025-08-11 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 64K | — |
| Max output | 16K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.80 | — |
| Results tracked | 15 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: —, Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.4% |
Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 59.8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1334 | — |
Math GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1354 | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 38% |
| LMArena Expert | 1353 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1154 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1303 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1298 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1336 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1311 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1304 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1333 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1295 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1332 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5V better than Qwen3-1.7B?
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and Qwen3-1.7B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.