Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs QwQ-32B
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 39.8 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 5 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where QwQ-32B leads 49.0 to 41.3.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1325 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1359 |
Knowledge Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | 1324 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90), QwQ-32B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | 1378 |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | 1297 |
| LMArena French | — | 1336 |
| LMArena German | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1354 |
Instruction Following QwQ-32B leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than QwQ-32B?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.6V or QwQ-32B better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.9 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and QwQ-32B share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.