Model comparison
GLM-5V-Turbo vs Ring-2.6-1T
GLM-5V-Turbo has enough public results to be ranked (#86); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5V-Turbo leads 28.5 to 25.3.
- Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 36.3 |
| Released | 2026-04-01 | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.20 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 3 |
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), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1400 | — |
| SciCode | — | 42.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1467 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 432.57 |
Reasoning GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 28.5 (#87), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 3.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | — |
Math Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 36.6 (#109), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1440 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.9 (#113), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1451 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.1 (#41), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1264 | — |
| LMArena Document | 1416 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.2 (#69), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1420 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1488 | — |
| LMArena French | 1443 | — |
| LMArena German | 1422 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1399 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1432 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1446 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.1 (#75), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1422 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#76), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1439 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.6 (#69), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1414 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1432 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5V-Turbo better than Ring-2.6-1T?
GLM-5V-Turbo has enough public results to be ranked (#86); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is GLM-5V-Turbo or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5V-Turbo and Ring-2.6-1T share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5V-Turbo has 19 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.