Model comparison

GLM-4.6V vs Hy3

Hy3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.2 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 11 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6V Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.3

Rank #137 Confirmed

Hy3

Tencent

44.2

Rank #79 Confirmed

Summary

They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 1 category and Hy3 in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in coding, where Hy3 leads 46.8 to 40.9.
Hy3 is cheaper at $0.0825 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.
Hy3 accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

GLM-4.6V and Hy3 specifications
	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
Provider	Z.ai (Zhipu)	Tencent
Noometry Index	41.3	44.2
Released	2025-12-08	2026-07-06
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	128K	262K
Max output	33K	128K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.30	$0.0825
Output $ / M tokens	$0.90	$0.33
Results tracked	12	19

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

Category by category

Coding Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128), Hy3: 46.8 (#63)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Coding	1390	1464
LMArena WebDev	—	1508

Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads

GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115), Hy3: 26.1 (#136)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Hard Prompts	1368	1447
NYT Connections (extended)	—	41.2%

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.6V: —, Hy3: 40.1 (#93)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Math	—	1475

Knowledge Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149), Hy3: 40.8 (#114)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Expert	1371	1460

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90), Hy3: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Vision	1164	—

Multilingual Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141), Hy3: 53.5 (#65)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Non-English	1359	1426
LMArena Chinese	1425	1493
LMArena Russian	1340	1432
LMArena French	—	1461
LMArena German	—	1439
LMArena Japanese	—	1392
LMArena Korean	—	1395
LMArena Spanish	—	1456

Instruction Following Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151), Hy3: 75.1 (#70)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Instruction Following	1352	1426

Long Context Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143), Hy3: 44.1 (#75)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Longer Query	1358	1442

Writing & Preference Hy3 leads

GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137), Hy3: 62.2 (#81)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.6V	Hy3
LMArena Text	1377	1439
LMArena Creative Writing	1347	1402
LMArena Multi-Turn	1360	1436

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6V better than Hy3?

Hy3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.2 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or Hy3?

Hy3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0825 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.

Is GLM-4.6V or Hy3 better for coding?

Hy3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.8 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Hy3 does, with 262K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Hy3 share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Hy3 has 19.