Model comparison
GLM-5 vs Qwen2.5-Max
GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5 leads 52.3 to 35.3.
- GLM-5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.1 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2026-02-11 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 45 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5 leads
GLM-5: 49.0 (#52), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1461 | 1359 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 72.1% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 72.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1434 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 69.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 48.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 765.62 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5: 31.1 (#71), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 52.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 82.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 9.8% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 73.7% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 86.8% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,432 | — |
Reasoning GLM-5 leads
GLM-5: 27.6 (#116), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1452 | 1360 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.83 | 132.53 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 53.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 74.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 44.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 10% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math GLM-5 leads
GLM-5: 46.4 (#71), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1440 | 1369 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 65.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 16.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5 leads
GLM-5: 52.3 (#64), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1454 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 87.8% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.1% | — |
Multilingual GLM-5 leads
GLM-5: 53.7 (#58), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1430 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1511 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1455 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1445 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1416 | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | 1423 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1436 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1454 | 1377 |
Instruction Following GLM-5 leads
GLM-5: 75.2 (#67), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1428 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context GLM-5 leads
GLM-5: 44.7 (#60), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1446 | 1358 |
| CL-bench | 18.7% | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-5 leads
GLM-5: 66.0 (#38), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1446 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1439 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1601 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5 better than Qwen2.5-Max?
GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-5 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5 and Qwen2.5-Max share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5 has 45 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.