Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Step 2 16k Exp 202412
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
StepFunSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 7 categories and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.6V leads 48.8 to 43.9.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 38.6 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 12 |
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), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 37.9 (#170)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1316 |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 24.8 (#140)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1299 |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 33.6 (#171)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1305 |
Knowledge GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 34.6 (#187)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1279 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 43.9 (#176)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1290 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1331 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1324 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 68.1 (#187)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1287 |
Long Context GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 39.7 (#165)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1307 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 52.5 (#168)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Step 2 16k Exp 202412 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1321 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1328 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1292 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Step 2 16k Exp 202412?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.6V or Step 2 16k Exp 202412 better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 37.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 has 12.