Model comparison

GLM-5 vs Qwen3 8B

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 8B costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

46.1

Rank #66 Confirmed

Qwen3 8B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.7

Rank #238 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3 8B in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5 leads 52.3 to 36.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 87.8% for GLM-5 and 56.8% for Qwen3 8B.
  • Qwen3 8B is cheaper at $0.18 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $3.20 for GLM-5.
  • GLM-5 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

GLM-5 and Qwen3 8B specifications
GLM-5Qwen3 8B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index46.133.7
Released2026-02-112025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K131K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$1$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$3.20$0.70
Results tracked4511

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 49.0 (#52), Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen3 8B
SWE-bench Verified72.1%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
LMArena WebDev1434—
SWE-bench Multilingual69.7%—
SciCode—22.6%
WeirdML48.2%—
LMArena Coding1461—
ALE-Bench765.62—

Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call

GLM-5: 31.1 (#71), Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen3 8B
Terminal-Bench52.4%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—42.6%
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), Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen3 8B
Chess Puzzles10%5%
Epoch Capabilities Index145.83136.17
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench53.2%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark75%—
NYT Connections (extended)74.8%—
ARC-AGI-144.7%—
CritPt—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1452—
DTBench—59.7%
LMCA—8.8%
ForecastBench61—

Math GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 46.4 (#71), Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191)

Knowledge GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 52.3 (#64), Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen3 8B
GPQA Diamond87.8%56.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.1%4.8%
LMArena Expert1454—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5: 53.7 (#58), Qwen3 8B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen3 8B
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), Qwen3 8B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen3 8B
LMArena Instruction Following1428—

Long Context GLM-5 leads

GLM-5: 44.7 (#60), Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen3 8B
Fiction.LiveBench—62.1%
CL-bench18.7%—
LMArena Longer Query1446—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5: 66.0 (#38), Qwen3 8B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5Qwen3 8B
LMArena Text1446—
LMArena Creative Writing1439—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1601—
LMArena Multi-Turn1456—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5 better than Qwen3 8B?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 8B costs 5.0× 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 Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; GLM-5 lists at $1 and $3.20.

Is GLM-5 or Qwen3 8B better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 34.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5 does, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5 and Qwen3 8B share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5 has 45 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper