Model comparison

GLM-5 vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

46.1

Rank #66 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5 leads 52.3 to 19.5.

Side by side

GLM-5 and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct specifications
GLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index46.132.7
Released2026-02-11—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1—
Output $ / M tokens$3.20—
Results tracked4516

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 49.0 (#52), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding14611210
SWE-bench Verified72.1%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
LMArena WebDev1434—
SWE-bench Multilingual69.7%—
WeirdML48.2%—
ALE-Bench765.62—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5: 31.1 (#71), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
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), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14521208
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench53.2%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark75%—
NYT Connections (extended)74.8%—
ARC-AGI-144.7%—
Chess Puzzles10%—
Epoch Capabilities Index145.83—
ForecastBench61—

Math GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 46.4 (#71), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Math14401208
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions65.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202580%—
Omni-MATH—16.1%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)16.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 52.3 (#64), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
GPQA Diamond87.8%—
MMLU-Pro—41.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.1%—
GPQA (HELM)—28.7%
LMArena Expert1454—

Multilingual GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 53.7 (#58), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English14301160
LMArena Chinese15111192
LMArena Russian14361187
LMArena French1455—
LMArena German1445—
LMArena Japanese1416—
LMArena Korean1423—
LMArena Spanish1454—

Instruction Following GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 75.2 (#67), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14281186
IFEval—78%

Long Context GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 44.7 (#60), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14461194
CL-bench18.7%—

Writing & Preference GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 66.0 (#38), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Text14461218
LMArena Creative Writing14391199
LMArena Multi-Turn14561221
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1601—
WildBench—73.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5 better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5 or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 35.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5 and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5 has 45 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper