Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Olmo 7b Instruct

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.8

Rank #59 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 6 categories and Olmo 7b Instruct in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.1 leads 66.9 to 25.8.

Side by side

GLM-5.1 and Olmo 7b Instruct specifications
GLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index47.830.3
Released2026-04-07—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window200K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4110

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), Olmo 7b Instruct: 29.6 (#303)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Coding14851016
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
LMArena WebDev1508—
SciCode43.8%—
WeirdML57.1%—
ALE-Bench887.1—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
APEX-Agents40.9%—
ExploitBench18.1%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 25,634—

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), Olmo 7b Instruct: 18.8 (#274)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts1472993
SimpleBench55.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)77.7%—
CritPt4.6%—
Chess Puzzles19%—
Thematic Generalization69.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index149.84—

Math GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), Olmo 7b Instruct: 30.2 (#237)

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
GPQA Diamond89.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34%—
LMArena Expert1476—

Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), Olmo 7b Instruct: 24.0 (#291)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Non-English1447977
LMArena Chinese15151014
LMArena Russian1454947
LMArena French1474—
LMArena German1465—
LMArena Japanese1434—
LMArena Korean1418—
LMArena Spanish1469—

Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), Olmo 7b Instruct: 49.0 (#301)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1451978

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1466—

Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), Olmo 7b Instruct: 25.8 (#303)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Text14611032
LMArena Creative Writing1453990
LMArena Multi-Turn14721007
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than Olmo 7b Instruct?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.1 or Olmo 7b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Olmo 7b Instruct share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 7b Instruct has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper