Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

Qwen3 235B-A22B Alibaba (Qwen)

43.5

Rank #91 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 5 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 235B-A22B leads 50.4 to 39.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 47.4% for GLM-4.6 and 69.4% for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
  • GLM-4.6 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
  • GLM-4.6 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

GLM-4.6 and Qwen3 235B-A22B specifications
GLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.443.5
Released2025-09-302025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K131K
Max output131K16K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$2.80
Results tracked2949

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 44.3 (#75)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
SciCode38.4%42.4%
LMArena Coding14491445
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)55.4%—
Aider Polyglot—59.6%
LMArena WebDev1340—
WeirdML—41%
ALE-Bench340.82—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.9 (#51)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.4%52.1%
Terminal-Bench24.5%—
Vending-Bench 2—-11.34

Reasoning GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.7 (#311)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
Kagi LLM Benchmark47.4%69.4%
CritPt1.1%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14401433
ARC-AGI-2—1.3%
SimpleBench—31%
ARC-AGI-1—11%
Chess Puzzles—12%
Mystery Game Puzzles—9%
DTBench—80.3%
LMCA—29.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.85
ForecastBench—59.7

Math Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 50.4 (#57)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Math14321432
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)3.8%8.5%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.7%
Omni-MATH—71.8%
MATH Level 5—68.9%

Knowledge Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.6 (#73)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.5%9.3%
LMArena Expert14311463
GPQA Diamond—80.1%
SimpleQA Verified—40.4%
MMLU-Pro—84.4%
Confabulations—15.6%
GPQA (HELM)—72.7%

Multilingual GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.3 (#89)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Non-English14261409
LMArena Chinese14991481
LMArena French14591445
LMArena German14471433
LMArena Japanese13931399
LMArena Korean14001391
LMArena Russian14191411
LMArena Spanish14361430

Instruction Following GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.6 (#136)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Instruction Following14101408
IFEval—83.5%

Long Context Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#26)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Longer Query14221426
Fiction.LiveBench—75%

Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.6 (#108)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Text14401419
LMArena Creative Writing14111384
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14111366
LMArena Multi-Turn14271432
Short-Story Creative Writing—83%
WildBench—86.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6 better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or Qwen3 235B-A22B?

GLM-4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B-A22B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

Is GLM-4.6 or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?

Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Qwen3 235B-A22B share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.

Related comparisons

Go deeper