Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5 vs Qwen Max

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

46.1

Rank #66 Confirmed

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.7

Rank #230 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5 leads 46.4 to 22.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 80% for GLM-5 and 16.1% for Qwen Max.
  • GLM-5 is cheaper at $1 / $3.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
  • GLM-5 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 33K.
  • GLM-5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5Qwen Max
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index46.134.7
Released2026-02-112024-04-03
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K33K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$1$1.60
Output $ / M tokens$3.20$6.40
Results tracked4523

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 49.0 (#52), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
LMArena Coding14611288
SWE-bench Verified72.1%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
Aider Polyglot—21.8%
LMArena WebDev1434—
SWE-bench Multilingual69.7%—
WeirdML48.2%—
ALE-Bench765.62—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5: 31.1 (#71), Qwen Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
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), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14521269
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), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202580%16.1%
LMArena Math14401275
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)16.4%1%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions65.7%—
MATH Level 5—67.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 52.3 (#64), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
GPQA Diamond87.8%56.1%
LMArena Expert14541248
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.1%—

Multilingual GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 53.7 (#58), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
LMArena Non-English14301263
LMArena Chinese15111254
LMArena French14551330
LMArena German14451254
LMArena Japanese14161205
LMArena Korean14231142
LMArena Russian14361274
LMArena Spanish14541290

Instruction Following GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 75.2 (#67), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
LMArena Instruction Following14281262

Long Context GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 44.7 (#60), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
LMArena Longer Query14461288
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench18.7%—

Writing & Preference GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 66.0 (#38), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen Max
LMArena Text14461282
LMArena Creative Writing14391248
LMArena Multi-Turn14561277
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1601—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5 better than Qwen Max?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5 or Qwen Max?

GLM-5 is cheaper. It lists at $1 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

Is GLM-5 or Qwen Max better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5 does, with 205K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5 and Qwen Max share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5 has 45 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper