Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.5V vs Qwen3-30B-A3B

GLM-4.5V and Qwen3-30B-A3B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.8 vs 38.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5V Z.ai (Zhipu)

39.8

Rank #158 Confirmed

Qwen3-30B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

38.9

Rank #179 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5V scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3-30B-A3B in 5 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where GLM-4.5V leads 39.6 to 31.0.
  • Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $1.80 for GLM-4.5V.
  • GLM-4.5V accepts more context: 64K tokens versus 41K.

Side by side

GLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.838.9
Released2025-08-112025-04-28
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window64K41K
Max output16K16K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.12
Output $ / M tokens$1.80$0.50
Results tracked1532

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), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Coding13471416
SciCode—33.3%
WeirdML—29.8%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—41.4%

Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
Kagi LLM Benchmark59.8%54.9%
LMArena Hard Prompts13341398
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles—8%
DTBench—69.3%
LMCA—22.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—139.63

Math Too close to call

GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Math13541394
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—47.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—70.3%

Knowledge Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Expert13531396
GPQA Diamond—70.1%
Confabulations—12.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92), Qwen3-30B-A3B: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Vision1154—

Multilingual Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Non-English13031372
LMArena Chinese13371433
LMArena Russian12981370
LMArena Spanish13361404
LMArena French—1418
LMArena German—1380
LMArena Japanese—1337
LMArena Korean—1331

Instruction Following Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following13111363

Long Context GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Longer Query13041379
Fiction.LiveBench—40.6%

Writing & Preference Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5VQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Text13331384
LMArena Creative Writing12951317
LMArena Multi-Turn13321378
Short-Story Creative Writing—75.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5V better than Qwen3-30B-A3B?

GLM-4.5V and Qwen3-30B-A3B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.8 vs 38.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5V or Qwen3-30B-A3B?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5V lists at $0.60 and $1.80.

Is GLM-4.5V or Qwen3-30B-A3B better for coding?

GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 37.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.5V does, with 64K tokens against 41K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and Qwen3-30B-A3B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper