Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Granite 4.2 3b

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 39.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.6

Rank #51 Confirmed

Granite 4.2 3b IBM

39.0

Rank #163 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Granite 4.2 3b in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 55.0 to 35.6.

Side by side

GLM-5.1 and Granite 4.2 3b specifications
GLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)IBM
Noometry Index47.639.0
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: 48.5 (#52), Granite 4.2 3b: 39.4 (#146)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Coding14861363
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
LMArena WebDev1509—
SciCode43.8%—
WeirdML57.1%—
ALE-Bench887.1—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106), Granite 4.2 3b: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
APEX-Agents40.9%—
ExploitBench18.1%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 25,634—

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57), Granite 4.2 3b: 25.0 (#136)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Hard Prompts14721308
SimpleBench55.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)77.7%—
CritPt4.6%—
Chess Puzzles19%—
Thematic Generalization69.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index149.86—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48), Granite 4.2 3b: —

Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45), Granite 4.2 3b: 35.6 (#169)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Expert14771313
GPQA Diamond89.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34%—

Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34), Granite 4.2 3b: 42.4 (#193)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Non-English14481268
LMArena Chinese15161268
LMArena Russian14531249
LMArena French1478—
LMArena German1466—
LMArena Japanese1436—
LMArena Korean1423—
LMArena Spanish1467—

Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41), Granite 4.2 3b: 67.2 (#195)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Instruction Following14511271

Long Context GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51), Granite 4.2 3b: 39.3 (#179)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Longer Query14671293

Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29), Granite 4.2 3b: 47.9 (#202)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Text14621295
LMArena Creative Writing14541215
LMArena Multi-Turn14731293
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than Granite 4.2 3b?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 39.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.1 or Granite 4.2 3b better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 39.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Granite 4.2 3b share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.2 3b has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper