Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Hunyuan Turbos 20250226

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 40.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.6

Rank #51 Confirmed

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 Tencent

40.6

Rank #138 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 55.0 to 36.4.
  • GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.1 and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 specifications
GLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Tencent
Noometry Index47.640.6
Released2026-04-07—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window200K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4116

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), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 39.3 (#148)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Coding14861361
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
LMArena WebDev1509—
SciCode43.8%—
WeirdML57.1%—
ALE-Bench887.1—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
APEX-Agents40.9%—
ExploitBench18.1%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 25,634—

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 26.7 (#115)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Hard Prompts14721374
SimpleBench55.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)77.7%—
CritPt4.6%—
Chess Puzzles19%—
Thematic Generalization69.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index149.86—

Math GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 34.8 (#155)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Math14721359
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)36.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.3%—
ProofBench22.2%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)33.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)12.5%—

Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 36.4 (#158)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Expert14771338
GPQA Diamond89.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34%—

Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 49.1 (#132)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Non-English14481362
LMArena Chinese15161416
LMArena French14781390
LMArena German14661356
LMArena Japanese14361338
LMArena Korean14231351
LMArena Russian14531368
LMArena Spanish1467—

Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 71.2 (#153)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Instruction Following14511344

Long Context GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 41.6 (#132)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Longer Query14671365

Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 57.5 (#125)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Text14621377
LMArena Creative Writing14541358
LMArena Multi-Turn14731387
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than Hunyuan Turbos 20250226?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 40.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.1 or Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 39.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper