# GLM-4.5 vs Olmo 3 32b Think

> GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-5-vs-olmo-3-32b-think
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 14

## Summary

- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.5 leads 52.8 to 41.2.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 42.0 | 38.7 |
| Rank | 122 | 183 |
| Context | 131K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | — |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125)
- Olmo 3 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1434 | 1319 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 54.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 344.82 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.52 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100)
- Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1429 | 1302 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116)
- Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1427 | 1316 |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179)
- Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1433 | 1273 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77)
- Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1300 |
| LMArena French | 1418 | 1291 |
| LMArena German | 1407 | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | 1414 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1454 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104)
- Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 1275 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201)
- Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1412 | 1296 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 58.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127)
- Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1430 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1395 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1415 | 1290 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.4% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1343 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.5 better than Olmo 3 32b Think?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is GLM-4.5 or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 38.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Olmo 3 32b Think share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.