Model comparison
GLM-5V-Turbo vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 6.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5V-Turbo's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5V-Turbo leads 39.4 to 12.6.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $4 for GLM-5V-Turbo.
- GLM-5V-Turbo accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 29.0 |
| Released | 2026-04-01 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 131K |
| Max output | 131K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.20 | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 15 |
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), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1401 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1466 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 29.7 (#89), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.51 |
Math GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.4 (#106), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1441 | — |
Knowledge GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.6 (#117), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | — |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.9 (#42), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1264 | — |
| LMArena Document | 1416 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.0 (#73), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1420 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1488 | — |
| LMArena French | 1444 | — |
| LMArena German | 1423 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1396 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1431 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1450 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.0 (#80), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1423 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#80), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1438 | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.5 (#73), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1416 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1432 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5V-Turbo better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 6.2× 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 Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; GLM-5V-Turbo lists at $1.20 and $4.
Is GLM-5V-Turbo or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 36.5 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 Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5V-Turbo has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.