Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Qwen1.5-7B
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.6V leads 56.8 to 29.8.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| 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 GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1107 |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1066 |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1080 |
Knowledge GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1055 |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), Qwen1.5-7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1006 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1058 |
Long Context GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1090 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1084 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1061 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Qwen1.5-7B?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.6V or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Qwen1.5-7B share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.