Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs Granite 4.0 Micro

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.0 Micro costs 25× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

Granite 4.0 Micro IBM

29.0

Rank #318 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.6 leads 40.2 to 9.9.
  • Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper at $0.017 / $0.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.6.
  • GLM-4.6 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

GLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)IBM
Noometry Index41.429.0
Released2025-09-302025-10-02
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K131K
Max output131K118K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.017
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$0.11
Results tracked298

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), Granite 4.0 Micro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)55.4%—
LMArena WebDev1340—
SciCode38.4%—
LMArena Coding1449—
ALE-Bench340.82—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), Granite 4.0 Micro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
Terminal-Bench24.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.4%—

Reasoning GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), Granite 4.0 Micro: 19.2 (#265)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
Kagi LLM Benchmark47.4%—
CritPt1.1%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1440—

Math GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), Granite 4.0 Micro: 12.0 (#307)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—2.8%
Omni-MATH—20.9%
LMArena Math1432—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)3.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124), Granite 4.0 Micro: 9.9 (#304)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
GPQA Diamond—28.3%
MMLU-Pro—39.5%
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.5%—
GPQA (HELM)—30.7%
LMArena Expert1431—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), Granite 4.0 Micro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
LMArena Non-English1426—
LMArena Chinese1499—
LMArena French1459—
LMArena German1447—
LMArena Japanese1393—
LMArena Korean1400—
LMArena Russian1419—
LMArena Spanish1436—

Instruction Following GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), Granite 4.0 Micro: 69.9 (#169)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
IFEval—84.9%
LMArena Instruction Following1410—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), Granite 4.0 Micro: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
LMArena Longer Query1422—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), Granite 4.0 Micro: 46.7 (#216)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Granite 4.0 Micro
LMArena Text1440—
LMArena Creative Writing1411—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1411—
WildBench—67%
LMArena Multi-Turn1427—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6 better than Granite 4.0 Micro?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.0 Micro costs 25× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or Granite 4.0 Micro?

Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper. It lists at $0.017 per million input tokens and $0.11 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.6 does, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Granite 4.0 Micro share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.0 Micro has 8.

Related comparisons

Go deeper