Model comparison
GLM-5.1 vs Magistral Small
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Small costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 4 categories and Magistral Small in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.1 leads 38.2 to 6.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 93.3% for GLM-5.1 and 30% for Magistral Small.
- Magistral Small is cheaper at $0.50 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
- GLM-5.1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 47.6 | 29.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2025-06-10 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 128K |
| Max output | 131K | 40K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | $1.50 |
| Results tracked | 41 | 10 |
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), Magistral Small: 37.8 (#172)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 43.8% | 35.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1509 | — |
| WeirdML | 57.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1486 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | — |
Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57), Magistral Small: 6.9 (#345)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 4.6% | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | 3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.86 | 133.19 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 6.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 5% |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | — |
| DTBench | — | 61.3% |
Math GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48), Magistral Small: 24.9 (#253)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | 30% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 22.2% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1472 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45), Magistral Small: 30.9 (#215)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | 56.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1477 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1516 | — |
| LMArena French | 1478 | — |
| LMArena German | 1466 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1436 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1423 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1453 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1467 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1467 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1462 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1473 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.1 better than Magistral Small?
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Small costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or Magistral Small?
Magistral Small is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.
Is GLM-5.1 or Magistral Small better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-5.1 does, with 200K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Magistral Small share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Small has 10.