Model comparison

GLM-5.2 vs Yi-1.5-34B

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

50.9

Rank #38 Confirmed

Yi-1.5-34B 01.AI

30.2

Rank #286 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.2 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-5.2 leads 57.1 to 14.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 91.9% for GLM-5.2 and 32% for Yi-1.5-34B.

Side by side

GLM-5.2 and Yi-1.5-34B specifications
GLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)01.AI
Noometry Index50.930.2
Released2026-06-132024-05-13
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked5021

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 50.9 (#37), Yi-1.5-34B: 31.9 (#267)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
LMArena Coding14841169
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
DeepSWE43.8%—
FrontierCode24.5%—
LMArena WebDev1604—
SciCode50.5%—
WeirdML70.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—33.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—43.8%
ALE-Bench1,047—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 31.6 (#63), Yi-1.5-34B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
τ²-bench Banking37.1%—
PostTrainBench31.7%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 28,314—

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 42.1 (#46), Yi-1.5-34B: 21.5 (#195)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
LMArena Hard Prompts14801160
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 Index151.76—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 55.4 (#35), Yi-1.5-34B: 25.3 (#248)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
LMArena Math14821182
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.4%—
ProofBench35%—
MATH Level 5—25.5%

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#36), Yi-1.5-34B: 14.8 (#290)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
GPQA Diamond91.9%32%
LMArena Expert14841144
SimpleQA Verified34.2%—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 56.0 (#25), Yi-1.5-34B: 32.5 (#251)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
LMArena Non-English14591121
LMArena Chinese15181213
LMArena French14761155
LMArena German14701111
LMArena Japanese14511021
LMArena Korean14451005
LMArena Russian14671091
LMArena Spanish14771120

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 77.1 (#32), Yi-1.5-34B: 59.4 (#252)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
LMArena Instruction Following14651139

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Yi-1.5-34B: 34.6 (#243)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
LMArena Longer Query14791144

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 70.7 (#20), Yi-1.5-34B: 37.6 (#252)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Yi-1.5-34B
LMArena Text14701173
LMArena Creative Writing14651135
LMArena Multi-Turn14681153
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1757—
EQ-Bench 41222—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than Yi-1.5-34B?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.2 or Yi-1.5-34B better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.9 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Yi-1.5-34B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 50 scored results on Noometry and Yi-1.5-34B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper