Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5V-Turbo vs Llama 3.1-405B

GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5V-Turbo Z.ai (Zhipu)

43.8

Rank #84 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.1-405B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5V-Turbo leads 62.5 to 38.9.
  • Llama 3.1-405B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index43.830.7
Released2026-04-012024-07-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.20—
Output $ / M tokens$4—
Results tracked1942

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 42.1 (#111), Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Coding14661291
LMArena WebDev1401—
WeirdML—21.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5V-Turbo: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
TheAgentCompany—7.4%
Cybench—7.5%

Reasoning GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 29.7 (#89), Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Hard Prompts14431269
SimpleBench—23%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—45%
DTBench—61.4%
BIG-Bench Hard—82.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—128.75
ForecastBench—59.9
HellaSwag—89.2%
PIQA—85.9%
WinoGrande—89.2%

Math GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.4 (#106), Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Math14411281
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—9.7%
Omni-MATH—24.9%
MATH Level 5—49.8%

Knowledge GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.6 (#117), Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Expert14521243
GPQA Diamond—50.9%
MMLU-Pro—72.3%
Confabulations—17.6%
GPQA (HELM)—52.2%
ARC (AI2) Challenge—95.3%
MMLU—84.5%
TriviaQA—82.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.9 (#42), Llama 3.1-405B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Vision1264—
LMArena Document1416—

Multilingual GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.0 (#73), Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Non-English14201248
LMArena Chinese14881242
LMArena French14441279
LMArena German14231252
LMArena Korean13961184
LMArena Russian14311265
LMArena Spanish14501260
LMArena Japanese—1208

Instruction Following GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.0 (#80), Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Instruction Following14231259
IFEval—81.1%

Long Context GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#80), Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Longer Query14381266

Writing & Preference GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.5 (#73), Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Text14371284
LMArena Creative Writing14161262
LMArena Multi-Turn14321297
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—870
WildBench—78.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5V-Turbo better than Llama 3.1-405B?

GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5V-Turbo or Llama 3.1-405B better for coding?

GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5V-Turbo and Llama 3.1-405B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5V-Turbo has 19 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper