Model comparison

GLM-5.2 vs Granite 4.1 8b

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Granite 4.1 8b IBM

37.4

Rank #205 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.2 scores higher in 8 categories and Granite 4.1 8b in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.2 leads 70.4 to 48.1.

Side by side

GLM-5.2 and Granite 4.1 8b specifications
GLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)IBM
Noometry Index51.137.4
Released2026-06-13—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked5113

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41), Granite 4.1 8b: 30.1 (#297)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
LMArena WebDev16031192
LMArena Coding14851312
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
DeepSWE43.8%—
FrontierCode24.5%—
SciCode50.5%—
WeirdML70.1%—
ALE-Bench1,047—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63), Granite 4.1 8b: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
APEX-Agents45.2%—
τ²-bench Banking37.1%—
PostTrainBench31.7%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 28,314—

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52), Granite 4.1 8b: 25.7 (#143)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
LMArena Hard Prompts14801293
ARC-AGI-222.8%—
SimpleBench58.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)74.3%—
ARC-AGI-177%—
CritPt20.9%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
EBR-Bench9.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles19%—
DTBench93.6%—
LMCA45.8%—
Surface Evolver Bench55.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.78—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43), Granite 4.1 8b: 36.4 (#166)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
LMArena Math14821312
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.4%—
ProofBench35%—

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40), Granite 4.1 8b: 36.1 (#174)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
LMArena Expert14861309
GPQA Diamond91.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34.2%—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26), Granite 4.1 8b: 41.7 (#204)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
LMArena Non-English14591261
LMArena Chinese15191337
LMArena Russian14661240
LMArena French1479—
LMArena German1468—
LMArena Japanese1451—
LMArena Korean1445—
LMArena Spanish1477—

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34), Granite 4.1 8b: 66.9 (#203)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
LMArena Instruction Following14651269

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Granite 4.1 8b: 38.7 (#193)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
LMArena Longer Query14791275

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21), Granite 4.1 8b: 48.1 (#204)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Granite 4.1 8b
LMArena Text14701290
LMArena Creative Writing14621251
LMArena Multi-Turn14691268
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1757—
EQ-Bench 41222—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than Granite 4.1 8b?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.2 or Granite 4.1 8b better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Granite 4.1 8b share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.1 8b has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper