# DeepSeek LLM 67B vs GLM-4.6

> GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-llm-67b-vs-glm-4-6
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 10

## Summary

- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek LLM 67B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.6 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.6 leads 40.2 to 7.0.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 41.4 |
| Rank | 347 | 135 |
| Context | — | 205K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.60 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.9 (#278)
- GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1096 | 1449 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 55.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1340 |
| SciCode | — | 38.4% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 340.82 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: —
- GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 24.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 72.4% |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 16.5 (#304)
- GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1070 | 1440 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 47.4% |
| CritPt | — | 1.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 110.5 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.7 (#324)
- GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1108 | 1432 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 6.4% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 3.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.0 (#313)
- GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 24.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.5% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1431 |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.4 (#267)
- GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1073 | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | 1499 |
| LMArena French | — | 1459 |
| LMArena German | — | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1393 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1400 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1419 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1436 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.4 (#277)
- GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1079 | 1410 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#265)
- GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1092 | 1422 |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.6 (#282)
- GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1105 | 1440 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1067 | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1082 | 1427 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1411 |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek LLM 67B better than GLM-4.6?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is DeepSeek LLM 67B or GLM-4.6 better for coding?

GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek LLM 67B and GLM-4.6 share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.