Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Granite 4.2 30b

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 41.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.8

Rank #59 Confirmed

Granite 4.2 30b IBM

41.8

Rank #130 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Granite 4.2 30b in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 54.9 to 39.1.

Side by side

GLM-5.1 and Granite 4.2 30b specifications
GLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)IBM
Noometry Index47.841.8
Released2026-04-07—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window200K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4111

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55), Granite 4.2 30b: 41.0 (#126)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
LMArena Coding14851396
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
LMArena WebDev1508—
SciCode43.8%—
WeirdML57.1%—
ALE-Bench887.1—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), Granite 4.2 30b: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
APEX-Agents40.9%—
ExploitBench18.1%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 25,634—

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), Granite 4.2 30b: 27.8 (#112)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
LMArena Hard Prompts14721374
SimpleBench55.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)77.7%—
CritPt4.6%—
Chess Puzzles19%—
Thematic Generalization69.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index149.84—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), Granite 4.2 30b: —

Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), Granite 4.2 30b: 39.1 (#138)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
LMArena Expert14761406
GPQA Diamond89.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34%—

Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), Granite 4.2 30b: 47.3 (#151)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
LMArena Non-English14471340
LMArena Chinese15151414
LMArena Russian14541343
LMArena French1474—
LMArena German1465—
LMArena Japanese1434—
LMArena Korean1418—
LMArena Spanish1469—

Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), Granite 4.2 30b: 71.2 (#155)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
LMArena Instruction Following14511347

Long Context GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), Granite 4.2 30b: 41.4 (#140)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
LMArena Longer Query14661359

Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), Granite 4.2 30b: 53.8 (#156)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 30b
LMArena Text14611361
LMArena Creative Writing14531288
LMArena Multi-Turn14721339
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than Granite 4.2 30b?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 41.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.1 or Granite 4.2 30b better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 41.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Granite 4.2 30b share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.2 30b has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper