Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 33.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 7 categories and Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.6V leads 38.0 to 25.0.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 33.0 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2024-11-21 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 14 |
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), Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: 36.0 (#214)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1235 |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115), Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: 23.9 (#169)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1220 |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: 14.2 (#303)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 4.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1242 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 42.7% |
Knowledge GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149), Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: 25.0 (#264)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90), Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141), Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: 39.9 (#222)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1236 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | 1249 |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | 1246 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151), Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: 64.8 (#227)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1233 |
Long Context GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143), Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: 37.1 (#222)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1224 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137), Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B: 45.6 (#223)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1256 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1231 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 33.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.6V or Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.9 versus 36.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Tulu 3 (Tülu 3) 70B has 14.