Model comparison
GLM-5.1 vs Yi-1.5-34B
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Yi-1.5-34B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 54.9 to 14.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 89.9% for GLM-5.1 and 32% for Yi-1.5-34B.
Side by side
| GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | 01.AI |
| Noometry Index | 47.8 | 30.6 |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2024-05-13 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | — |
| Results tracked | 41 | 21 |
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), Yi-1.5-34B: 32.4 (#272)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1485 | 1169 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1508 | — |
| SciCode | 43.8% | — |
| WeirdML | 57.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.9% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 43.8% |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), Yi-1.5-34B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | — |
Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), Yi-1.5-34B: 22.5 (#191)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | 1160 |
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | — |
| CritPt | 4.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.84 | — |
Math GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), Yi-1.5-34B: 27.5 (#249)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1473 | 1182 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 22.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 25.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), Yi-1.5-34B: 14.8 (#295)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | 32% |
| LMArena Expert | 1476 | 1144 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | — |
Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), Yi-1.5-34B: 32.3 (#256)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1447 | 1121 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1515 | 1213 |
| LMArena French | 1474 | 1156 |
| LMArena German | 1465 | 1111 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1434 | 1021 |
| LMArena Korean | 1418 | 1005 |
| LMArena Russian | 1454 | 1091 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1469 | 1121 |
Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), Yi-1.5-34B: 59.2 (#257)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | 1139 |
Long Context GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), Yi-1.5-34B: 34.6 (#248)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1466 | 1143 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), Yi-1.5-34B: 37.4 (#257)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Yi-1.5-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | 1173 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1135 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1472 | 1153 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.1 better than Yi-1.5-34B?
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-5.1 or Yi-1.5-34B better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Yi-1.5-34B share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Yi-1.5-34B has 21.