Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5V-Turbo vs Llama 3.2 3B

GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5V-Turbo's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

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

43.8

Rank #84 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 3B Meta

28.9

Rank #321 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.2 3B 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 24.7.
  • Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $4 for GLM-5V-Turbo.
  • GLM-5V-Turbo accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index43.828.9
Released2026-04-012024-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output131K118K
Input $ / M tokens$1.20$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$4$0.33
Results tracked1918

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 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Coding14661098
LMArena WebDev1401—
BigCodeBench Instruct—23.4%
BigCodeBench Complete—28.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5V-Turbo: —, Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—21.9%
BALROG—10.1%

Reasoning GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 29.7 (#89), Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Hard Prompts14431095

Math GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.4 (#106), Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Math14411126

Knowledge GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.6 (#117), Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Expert14521090

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.9 (#42), Llama 3.2 3B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Vision1264—
LMArena Document1416—

Multilingual GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.0 (#73), Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Non-English14201019
LMArena Chinese14881017
LMArena German14231056
LMArena Russian1431949
LMArena French1444—
LMArena Korean1396—
LMArena Spanish1450—

Instruction Following GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.0 (#80), Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Instruction Following14231089

Long Context GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#80), Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Longer Query14381100

Writing & Preference GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.5 (#73), Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboLlama 3.2 3B
LMArena Text14371110
LMArena Creative Writing14161094
LMArena Multi-Turn14321105
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—595

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5V-Turbo better than Llama 3.2 3B?

GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5V-Turbo's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5V-Turbo or Llama 3.2 3B?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; GLM-5V-Turbo lists at $1.20 and $4.

Is GLM-5V-Turbo or Llama 3.2 3B better for coding?

GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5V-Turbo does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5V-Turbo and Llama 3.2 3B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5V-Turbo has 19 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 3B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper