Model comparison

GLM-5 vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

46.1

Rank #66 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #181 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5 leads 52.3 to 35.5.
  • GLM-5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 specifications
GLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index46.138.8
Released2026-02-11—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1—
Output $ / M tokens$3.20—
Results tracked4514

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 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Coding14611314
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Hard Prompts14521299
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Math14401298
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions65.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202580%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)16.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 52.3 (#64), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Expert14541289
GPQA Diamond87.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.1%—

Multilingual GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 53.7 (#58), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Non-English14301265
LMArena Chinese15111314
LMArena German14451231
LMArena Japanese14161207
LMArena Russian14361271
LMArena French1455—
LMArena Korean1423—
LMArena Spanish1454—

Instruction Following GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 75.2 (#67), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Instruction Following14281275

Long Context GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 44.7 (#60), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Longer Query14461292
CL-bench18.7%—

Writing & Preference GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 66.0 (#38), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Text14461299
LMArena Creative Writing14391262
LMArena Multi-Turn14561299
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1601—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5 better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5 or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5 has 45 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper