Model comparison

GLM-5 vs Mercury 2.5

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

46.1

Rank #66 Confirmed

Mercury 2.5 Inception

33.5

Rank #242 Reported

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5 scores higher in 3 categories and Mercury 2.5 in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5 leads 46.4 to 23.3.
  • Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $3.20 for GLM-5.
  • Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5 and Mercury 2.5 specifications
GLM-5Mercury 2.5
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Inception
Noometry Index46.133.5
Released2026-02-112026-09-08
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K260K
Max output131K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1$0.04
Output $ / M tokens$3.20$0.15
Results tracked454

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 49.0 (#52), Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Mercury 2.5
ALE-Bench765.62301.65
SWE-bench Verified72.1%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
LMArena WebDev1434—
SWE-bench Multilingual69.7%—
SciCode—38.5%
WeirdML48.2%—
LMArena Coding1461—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5: 31.1 (#71), Mercury 2.5: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Mercury 2.5
Terminal-Bench52.4%—
τ²-bench Airline82.5%—
τ²-bench Banking9.8%—
τ²-bench Retail73.7%—
τ²-bench Telecom86.8%—
Vending-Bench 24,432—

Reasoning GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 27.6 (#116), Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Mercury 2.5
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench53.2%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark75%—
NYT Connections (extended)74.8%—
ARC-AGI-144.7%—
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles10%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1452—
Epoch Capabilities Index145.83—
ForecastBench61—

Math GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 46.4 (#71), Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5: 52.3 (#64), Mercury 2.5: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Mercury 2.5
GPQA Diamond87.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.1%—
LMArena Expert1454—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5: 53.7 (#58), Mercury 2.5: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Mercury 2.5
LMArena Non-English1430—
LMArena Chinese1511—
LMArena French1455—
LMArena German1445—
LMArena Japanese1416—
LMArena Korean1423—
LMArena Russian1436—
LMArena Spanish1454—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5: 75.2 (#67), Mercury 2.5: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Mercury 2.5
LMArena Instruction Following1428—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5: 44.7 (#60), Mercury 2.5: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Mercury 2.5
CL-bench18.7%—
LMArena Longer Query1446—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5: 66.0 (#38), Mercury 2.5: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Mercury 2.5
LMArena Text1446—
LMArena Creative Writing1439—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1601—
LMArena Multi-Turn1456—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5 better than Mercury 2.5?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5 or Mercury 2.5?

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; GLM-5 lists at $1 and $3.20.

Is GLM-5 or Mercury 2.5 better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5 and Mercury 2.5 share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5 has 45 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper