Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5V-Turbo vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

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

43.1

Rank #86 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.0

Rank #66 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 39.9.
  • Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $4 for GLM-5V-Turbo.
  • Qwen3.7 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

GLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.145.0
Released2026-04-012026-06-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1M
Max output131K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.20$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$4$1.60
Results tracked1932

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5V-Turbo leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 41.8 (#105), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.1 (#200)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding14671473
FrontierCode—10.2%
LMArena WebDev1400—
SciCode—45.5%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5V-Turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.2 (#130)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 28.5 (#87), Qwen3.7 Plus: 38.4 (#54)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts14431460
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84%
LMCA—37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.39

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 36.6 (#109), Qwen3.7 Plus: 49.3 (#47)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math14401467
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.9 (#113), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#46)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Expert14511467
GPQA Diamond—87.9%

Multimodal Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.1 (#41), Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.2 (#30)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision12641281
LMArena Document14161444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.2 (#69), Qwen3.7 Plus: 55.0 (#36)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English14201445
LMArena Chinese14881510
LMArena French14431471
LMArena German14221471
LMArena Korean13991416
LMArena Russian14321457
LMArena Spanish14461453
LMArena Japanese—1411

Instruction Following Too close to call

GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.1 (#75), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.9 (#49)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following14221439

Long Context Too close to call

GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#76), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#61)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query14391454

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.6 (#69), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.5 (#54)

BenchmarkGLM-5V-TurboQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text14371454
LMArena Creative Writing14141439
LMArena Multi-Turn14321459

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5V-Turbo better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5V-Turbo or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; GLM-5V-Turbo lists at $1.20 and $4.

Is GLM-5V-Turbo or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 36.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5V-Turbo and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5V-Turbo has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper