Model comparison
GLM-5.1 vs StarCoder 2 3B
GLM-5.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#59); StarCoder 2 3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
NVIDIASummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 1 category and StarCoder 2 3B in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-5.1 leads 48.7 to 33.5.
Side by side
| GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | NVIDIA |
| Noometry Index | 47.8 | 36.3 |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2024-02-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | — |
| Results tracked | 41 | 7 |
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), StarCoder 2 3B: 33.5
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1508 | — |
| SciCode | 43.8% | — |
| WeirdML | 57.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1485 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 21.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 27.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), StarCoder 2 3B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), StarCoder 2 3B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.84 | 88.76 |
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | — |
| CritPt | 4.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | — |
| WinoGrande | — | 57.1% |
Math Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), StarCoder 2 3B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 22.2% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1473 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 21.6% |
Knowledge Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), StarCoder 2 3B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1476 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 34.2% |
| MMLU | — | 36.6% |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), StarCoder 2 3B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1515 | — |
| LMArena French | 1474 | — |
| LMArena German | 1465 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1454 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1469 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), StarCoder 2 3B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), StarCoder 2 3B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1466 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), StarCoder 2 3B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | StarCoder 2 3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1472 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.1 better than StarCoder 2 3B?
GLM-5.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#59); StarCoder 2 3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is GLM-5.1 or StarCoder 2 3B better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and StarCoder 2 3B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and StarCoder 2 3B has 7.