Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Pixtral Large
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 3 categories and Pixtral Large in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.6V leads 56.6 to 32.9.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Pixtral Large.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 32.2 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 128K |
| Max output | 33K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128), Pixtral Large: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115), Pixtral Large: 21.7 (#218)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149), Pixtral Large: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | — |
Multimodal GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90), Pixtral Large: 30.6 (#111)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | 1089 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141), Pixtral Large: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151), Pixtral Large: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143), Pixtral Large: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137), Pixtral Large: 32.9 (#278)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 988 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Pixtral Large?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or Pixtral Large?
GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Pixtral Large lists at $2 and $6.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 128K tokens.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Pixtral Large share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Pixtral Large has 3.