Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Qwen3.5 Max Preview

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 45.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.8

Rank #59 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Max Preview Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #71 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3.5 Max Preview in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 54.9 to 41.8.
  • GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.1 and Qwen3.5 Max Preview specifications
GLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index47.845.3
Released2026-04-07—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window200K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4117

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), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 44.0 (#77)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Coding14851487
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
LMArena WebDev1508—
SciCode43.8%—
WeirdML57.1%—
ALE-Bench887.1—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
APEX-Agents40.9%—
ExploitBench18.1%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 25,634—

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 30.8 (#84)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Hard Prompts14721483
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), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 40.1 (#94)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Math14731474
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: 54.9 (#50), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 41.8 (#107)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Expert14761489
GPQA Diamond89.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34%—

Multilingual Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 56.2 (#22)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English14471465
LMArena Chinese15151534
LMArena French14741484
LMArena German14651487
LMArena Japanese14341495
LMArena Korean14181438
LMArena Russian14541471
LMArena Spanish14691470

Instruction Following Too close to call

GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 77.0 (#31)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Instruction Following14511467

Long Context Too close to call

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 45.2 (#45)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Longer Query14661476

Writing & Preference Too close to call

GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 66.0 (#41)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.1Qwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Text14611470
LMArena Creative Writing14531464
LMArena Multi-Turn14721478
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than Qwen3.5 Max Preview?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 45.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.1 or Qwen3.5 Max Preview better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 44.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Qwen3.5 Max Preview share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Max Preview has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper