Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs Hy3

Hy3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.2 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

Hy3 Tencent

44.2

Rank #79 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 0 categories and Hy3 in 8 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Hy3 leads 46.8 to 40.1.
  • Hy3 is cheaper at $0.0825 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.6.
  • Hy3 accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 205K.

Side by side

GLM-4.6 and Hy3 specifications
GLM-4.6Hy3
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Tencent
Noometry Index41.444.2
Released2025-09-302026-07-06
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K262K
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.0825
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$0.33
Results tracked2919

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

Category by category

Coding Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), Hy3: 46.8 (#63)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
LMArena WebDev13401508
LMArena Coding14491464
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)55.4%—
SciCode38.4%—
ALE-Bench340.82—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), Hy3: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
Terminal-Bench24.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.4%—

Reasoning Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), Hy3: 26.1 (#136)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
LMArena Hard Prompts14401447
Kagi LLM Benchmark47.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)—41.2%
CritPt1.1%—

Math Too close to call

GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), Hy3: 40.1 (#93)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
LMArena Math14321475
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)3.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Too close to call

GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124), Hy3: 40.8 (#114)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
LMArena Expert14311460
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.5%—

Multilingual Too close to call

GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), Hy3: 53.5 (#65)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
LMArena Non-English14261426
LMArena Chinese14991493
LMArena French14591461
LMArena German14471439
LMArena Japanese13931392
LMArena Korean14001395
LMArena Russian14191432
LMArena Spanish14361456

Instruction Following Too close to call

GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), Hy3: 75.1 (#70)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
LMArena Instruction Following14101426

Long Context Too close to call

GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), Hy3: 44.1 (#75)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
LMArena Longer Query14221442

Writing & Preference Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), Hy3: 62.2 (#81)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Hy3
LMArena Text14401439
LMArena Creative Writing14111402
LMArena Multi-Turn14271436
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1411—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6 better than Hy3?

Hy3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.2 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or Hy3?

Hy3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0825 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Is GLM-4.6 or Hy3 better for coding?

Hy3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.8 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Hy3 does, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Hy3 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Hy3 has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper