Model comparison
GLM-5.1 vs Mistral Medium
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 36.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Mistral Medium in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 54.9 to 25.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 93.3% for GLM-5.1 and 32.2% for Mistral Medium.
- GLM-5.1 is cheaper at $1.40 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.50 / $7.50 for Mistral Medium.
- Mistral Medium accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 47.8 | 36.3 |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2023-12-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | $1.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 41 | 36 |
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), Mistral Medium: 34.2 (#243)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 43.8% | 40.2% |
| WeirdML | 57.1% | 43.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1485 | 1434 |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | 763.98 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| FrontierCode | — | 8% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1508 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Mistral Medium leads
GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), Mistral Medium: 28.3 (#90)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 37.7% |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | — |
Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), Mistral Medium: 24.0 (#167)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 4.6% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | 1426 |
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 50% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| DTBench | — | 75.5% |
| LMCA | — | 26.1% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 26.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.84 | — |
Math GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), Mistral Medium: 28.1 (#245)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | 32.2% |
| ProofBench | 22.2% | 9% |
| LMArena Math | 1473 | 1408 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | 0.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 81.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), Mistral Medium: 25.0 (#265)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | 59.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1476 | 1408 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 4.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 22.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-5.1: —, Mistral Medium: 35.3 (#88)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1172 |
Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), Mistral Medium: 52.1 (#91)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1447 | 1408 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1515 | 1447 |
| LMArena French | 1474 | 1459 |
| LMArena German | 1465 | 1432 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1434 | 1378 |
| LMArena Korean | 1418 | 1380 |
| LMArena Russian | 1454 | 1411 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1469 | 1433 |
Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), Mistral Medium: 73.7 (#116)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | 1398 |
Long Context GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), Mistral Medium: 42.9 (#114)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1466 | 1406 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), Mistral Medium: 60.0 (#103)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | 1424 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1391 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1472 | 1418 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 77.3% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.1 better than Mistral Medium?
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 36.3 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or Mistral Medium?
GLM-5.1 is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium lists at $1.50 and $7.50.
Is GLM-5.1 or Mistral Medium better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mistral Medium does, with 262K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Mistral Medium share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium has 36.