Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Qwen3-1.7B
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.6V leads 37.4 to 19.6.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 26.2 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Qwen3-1.7B: 24.5 (#108)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.4% |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), Qwen3-1.7B: 18.5 (#263)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | — |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Qwen3-1.7B: 15.4 (#288)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
Knowledge GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#273)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 38% |
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Qwen3-1.7B?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Qwen3-1.7B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.