Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Llama 3-8B

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.8

Rank #59 Confirmed

Llama 3-8B Meta

25.5

Rank #344 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3-8B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 54.9 to 7.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 93.3% for GLM-5.1 and 1.9% for Llama 3-8B.

Side by side

GLM-5.1 and Llama 3-8B specifications
GLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index47.825.5
Released2026-04-072024-04-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window200K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4134

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), Llama 3-8B: 31.0 (#289)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
LMArena Coding14851152
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
LMArena WebDev1508—
SciCode43.8%—
WeirdML57.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—31.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—36.9%
ALE-Bench887.1—
HumanEval+—56.7%
MBPP+—54.8%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), Llama 3-8B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
APEX-Agents40.9%—
ExploitBench18.1%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 25,634—

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), Llama 3-8B: 14.3 (#326)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
Chess Puzzles19%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14721133
Epoch Capabilities Index149.84116.45
SimpleBench55.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)77.7%—
CritPt4.6%—
Thematic Generalization69.8%—
DTBench—43.9%
Adversarial NLI—57.3%
ForecastBench—58.6
WinoGrande—75.7%

Math GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), Llama 3-8B: 8.8 (#323)

Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), Llama 3-8B: 7.8 (#308)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
GPQA Diamond89.9%26.1%
LMArena Expert14761113
SimpleQA Verified34%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—82.8%
MMLU—68.8%
OpenBookQA—82.6%
TriviaQA—67.7%

Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), Llama 3-8B: 30.8 (#261)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
LMArena Non-English14471098
LMArena Chinese15151076
LMArena French14741159
LMArena German14651104
LMArena Japanese1434967
LMArena Korean14181004
LMArena Russian14541109
LMArena Spanish14691173

Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), Llama 3-8B: 58.4 (#260)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
LMArena Instruction Following14511127

Long Context GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), Llama 3-8B: 34.2 (#251)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
LMArena Longer Query14661128

Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), Llama 3-8B: 37.5 (#256)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Llama 3-8B
LMArena Text14611166
LMArena Creative Writing14531150
LMArena Multi-Turn14721152
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than Llama 3-8B?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.1 or Llama 3-8B better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 31.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Llama 3-8B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3-8B has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper