Model comparison
GLM-4.6 vs Qwen Turbo
GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 11× 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.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.6 leads 36.4 to 14.5.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.6.
- Qwen Turbo accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
- GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 26.8 |
| Released | 2025-09-30 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | 1M |
| Max output | 131K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 39.9 (#137), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 55.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1339 | — |
| SciCode | 38.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1449 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 340.82 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 32.1 (#60), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 24.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 72.4% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 23.1 (#168), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 47.4% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1440 | — |
Math GLM-4.6 leads
GLM-4.6: 36.4 (#115), Qwen Turbo: 14.5 (#291)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1431 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 3.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.6 leads
GLM-4.6: 39.6 (#118), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 41.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1432 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 53.6 (#62), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1426 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1500 | — |
| LMArena French | 1459 | — |
| LMArena German | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1394 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1436 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 74.5 (#93), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1410 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#91), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1423 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 61.3 (#86), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1440 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1427 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6 better than Qwen Turbo?
GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 11× 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 Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Turbo does, with 1M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Qwen Turbo share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.