Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs Phi-4 Mini

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 Mini costs 7.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

Phi-4 Mini Microsoft

30.9

Rank #283 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 3 categories and Phi-4 Mini in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.6 leads 40.2 to 25.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 38.4% for GLM-4.6 and 10.8% for Phi-4 Mini.
  • Phi-4 Mini is cheaper at $0.075 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.6.
  • GLM-4.6 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

GLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Microsoft
Noometry Index41.430.9
Released2025-09-302024-12-11
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K128K
Max output131K4K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.075
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$0.30
Results tracked293

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), Phi-4 Mini: 28.1 (#317)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
SciCode38.4%10.8%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)55.4%—
LMArena WebDev1340—
LMArena Coding1449—
ALE-Bench340.82—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
Terminal-Bench24.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.4%—

Reasoning GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), Phi-4 Mini: 22.4 (#195)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
CritPt1.1%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark47.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1440—

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
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), Phi-4 Mini: 25.3 (#262)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.5%23.5%
LMArena Expert1431—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
LMArena Non-English1426—
LMArena Chinese1499—
LMArena French1459—
LMArena German1447—
LMArena Japanese1393—
LMArena Korean1400—
LMArena Russian1419—
LMArena Spanish1436—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
LMArena Instruction Following1410—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
LMArena Longer Query1422—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), Phi-4 Mini: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6Phi-4 Mini
LMArena Text1440—
LMArena Creative Writing1411—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1411—
LMArena Multi-Turn1427—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6 better than Phi-4 Mini?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 Mini costs 7.6× 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 Phi-4 Mini?

Phi-4 Mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Is GLM-4.6 or Phi-4 Mini better for coding?

GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 28.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.6 does, with 205K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Phi-4 Mini share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 Mini has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper