Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs Wizardlm 13b

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

40.9

Rank #132 Confirmed

Wizardlm 13b Microsoft

30.8

Rank #272 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 7 categories and Wizardlm 13b in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.6 leads 61.3 to 30.7.

Side by side

GLM-4.6 and Wizardlm 13b specifications
GLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Microsoft
Noometry Index40.930.8
Released2025-09-30—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked2910

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 39.9 (#137), Wizardlm 13b: 29.6 (#293)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
LMArena Coding14491035
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)55.4%—
LMArena WebDev1339—
SciCode38.4%—
ALE-Bench340.82—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 32.1 (#60), Wizardlm 13b: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
Terminal-Bench24.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.4%—

Reasoning GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 23.1 (#168), Wizardlm 13b: 18.5 (#265)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
LMArena Hard Prompts14401018
Kagi LLM Benchmark47.4%—
CritPt1.1%—

Math GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 36.4 (#115), Wizardlm 13b: 27.8 (#235)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
LMArena Math14311017
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)3.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 39.6 (#118), Wizardlm 13b: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.5%—
LMArena Expert1432—

Multilingual GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 53.6 (#62), Wizardlm 13b: 27.3 (#272)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
LMArena Non-English14261034
LMArena Chinese15001023
LMArena French1459—
LMArena German1447—
LMArena Japanese1394—
LMArena Korean1401—
LMArena Russian1418—
LMArena Spanish1436—

Instruction Following GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 74.5 (#93), Wizardlm 13b: 53.7 (#280)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
LMArena Instruction Following14101049

Long Context GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#91), Wizardlm 13b: 32.0 (#268)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
LMArena Longer Query14231054

Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 61.3 (#86), Wizardlm 13b: 30.7 (#282)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Wizardlm 13b
LMArena Text14401077
LMArena Creative Writing14111090
LMArena Multi-Turn14271047
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1411—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6 better than Wizardlm 13b?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.6 or Wizardlm 13b better for coding?

GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Wizardlm 13b share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 13b has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper