Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Hunyuan T1 20250711
GLM-4.6V and Hunyuan T1 20250711 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (40.9 vs 41.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
TencentSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 1 category and Hunyuan T1 20250711 in 6 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Tencent |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 41.8 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 40.2 (#129)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1389 |
Reasoning Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 27.3 (#106)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1399 |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Hunyuan T1 20250711: 36.0 (#132)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1414 |
Knowledge Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.1 (#139)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1395 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), Hunyuan T1 20250711: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 51.4 (#107)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1395 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1424 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1384 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1403 |
Instruction Following Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 72.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1375 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 42.2 (#123)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1384 |
Writing & Preference Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 59.7 (#105)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1401 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1391 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1393 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Hunyuan T1 20250711?
GLM-4.6V and Hunyuan T1 20250711 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (40.9 vs 41.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is GLM-4.6V or Hunyuan T1 20250711 better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (40.2 vs 40.2); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Hunyuan T1 20250711 share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan T1 20250711 has 13.