Model comparison

GLM-5.2 vs StarCoder 2 3B

GLM-5.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); StarCoder 2 3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

StarCoder 2 3B NVIDIA

36.3

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5.2 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-5.2 leads 51.3 to 33.5.

Side by side

GLM-5.2 and StarCoder 2 3B specifications
GLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)NVIDIA
Noometry Index51.136.3
Released2026-06-132024-02-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked517

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), StarCoder 2 3B: 33.5

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
DeepSWE43.8%—
FrontierCode24.5%—
LMArena WebDev1603—
SciCode50.5%—
WeirdML70.1%—
LMArena Coding1485—
BigCodeBench Complete—21.4%
ALE-Bench1,047—
HumanEval+—27.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63), StarCoder 2 3B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
APEX-Agents45.2%—
τ²-bench Banking37.1%—
PostTrainBench31.7%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 28,314—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52), StarCoder 2 3B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
Epoch Capabilities Index151.7888.76
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%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1480—
Mystery Game Puzzles19%—
DTBench93.6%—
LMCA45.8%—
Surface Evolver Bench55.6%—
WinoGrande—57.1%

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43), StarCoder 2 3B: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.4%—
ProofBench35%—
LMArena Math1482—
GSM8K—21.6%

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40), StarCoder 2 3B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
GPQA Diamond91.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34.2%—
LMArena Expert1486—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—34.2%
MMLU—36.6%

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26), StarCoder 2 3B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
LMArena Non-English1459—
LMArena Chinese1519—
LMArena French1479—
LMArena German1468—
LMArena Japanese1451—
LMArena Korean1445—
LMArena Russian1466—
LMArena Spanish1477—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34), StarCoder 2 3B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following1465—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), StarCoder 2 3B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
LMArena Longer Query1479—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21), StarCoder 2 3B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2StarCoder 2 3B
LMArena Text1470—
LMArena Creative Writing1462—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1757—
EQ-Bench 41222—
LMArena Multi-Turn1469—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than StarCoder 2 3B?

GLM-5.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); StarCoder 2 3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is GLM-5.2 or StarCoder 2 3B better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and StarCoder 2 3B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 51 scored results on Noometry and StarCoder 2 3B has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper