Model comparison

GLM-4.6V vs o3-mini

GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6V Z.ai (Zhipu)

40.9

Rank #133 Confirmed

o3-mini OpenAI

36.7

Rank #205 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 4 categories and o3-mini in 3 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.6V leads 26.5 to 16.3.
  • GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $1.10 / $4.40 for o3-mini.
  • o3-mini accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
  • GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.6V and o3-mini specifications
GLM-4.6Vo3-mini
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index40.936.7
Released2025-12-082024-12-20
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K200K
Max output33K100K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$1.10
Output $ / M tokens$0.90$4.40
Results tracked1251

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

Category by category

Coding o3-mini leads

GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128), o3-mini: 41.4 (#116)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
LMArena Coding13901378
Aider Polyglot—60.4%
SciCode—39.8%
GSO—1.3%
WeirdML—43.7%
LiveBench Coding—82.7%
CadEval—54%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.6V: —, o3-mini: 29.3 (#79)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
Cybench—22.5%

Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads

GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), o3-mini: 16.3 (#295)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
LMArena Hard Prompts13681366
ARC-AGI-2—3%
SimpleBench—22.8%
ARC-AGI-1—34.5%
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles—17%
LiveBench Reasoning—89.6%
Mystery Game Puzzles—7%
DTBench—68.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis—70.6%
LMCA—19%
Epoch Capabilities Index—140.35
ForecastBench—59.6
LiveBench—75.9%

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.6V: —, o3-mini: 27.6 (#236)

Knowledge Too close to call

GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), o3-mini: 38.3 (#135)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
LMArena Expert13721364
GPQA Diamond—77%
SimpleQA Verified—15.3%
Confabulations—17.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), o3-mini: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
LMArena Vision1164—

Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads

GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), o3-mini: 45.9 (#159)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
LMArena Non-English13591319
LMArena Chinese14261379
LMArena Russian13411304
LMArena French—1333
LMArena German—1303
LMArena Japanese—1286
LMArena Korean—1314
LMArena Spanish—1321

Instruction Following o3-mini leads

GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), o3-mini: 75.3 (#67)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
LMArena Instruction Following13511338
LiveBench Instruction Following—84.4%

Long Context GLM-4.6V leads

GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), o3-mini: 33.8 (#251)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
LMArena Longer Query13581343
Fiction.LiveBench—50%

Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads

GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), o3-mini: 50.4 (#177)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6Vo3-mini
LMArena Text13771337
LMArena Creative Writing13471286
LMArena Multi-Turn13591320
Short-Story Creative Writing—61.7%
LiveBench Language—50.7%

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6V better than o3-mini?

GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or o3-mini?

GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; o3-mini lists at $1.10 and $4.40.

Is GLM-4.6V or o3-mini better for coding?

o3-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 40.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

o3-mini does, with 200K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and o3-mini share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and o3-mini has 51.

Related comparisons

Go deeper