Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.6V leads 37.4 to 19.2.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 32.2 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.6 (#222)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1210 |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 22.6 (#174)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1208 |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 24.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1208 |
Knowledge GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.2 (#274)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | — | 41.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 28.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.0 (#243)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1187 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.8 (#238)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1186 |
| IFEval | — | 78% |
Long Context GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#229)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1194 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.3 (#231)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1199 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1221 |
| WildBench | — | 73.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.6V or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 34.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.