# GLM-4.5 vs Qwen Turbo

> GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-5-vs-qwen-turbo
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.5 leads 39.0 to 15.3.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.5.
- Qwen Turbo accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- GLM-4.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.0 | 27.1 |
| Rank | 122 | 335 |
| Context | 131K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | $0.05 |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | $0.20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 54.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1434 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 344.82 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.52 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1429 | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116)
- Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1427 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179)
- Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 41.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1433 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | — |
| LMArena French | 1418 | — |
| LMArena German | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1414 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1454 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 58.3% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1412 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1430 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1395 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.4% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1343 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1415 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.5 better than Qwen Turbo?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5 or Qwen Turbo?

Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Turbo does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Qwen Turbo share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.