# GLM-4.5 vs QwQ-32B

> GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-5-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 21

## Summary

- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 6 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where QwQ-32B leads 49.0 to 38.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 58.3% for GLM-4.5 and 83.3% for QwQ-32B.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 39.4 |
| Rank | 125 | 153 |
| Context | 131K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | — |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.5: 41.1 (#121)
- QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1434 | 1333 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 54.2% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 344.82 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.52 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.5: 27.7 (#99)
- QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1430 | 1326 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |

## Math

- GLM-4.5: 36.3 (#119)
- QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1427 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.5: 35.5 (#172)
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | 11.3% | 15.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1433 | 1323 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.5: 53.0 (#74)
- QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1423 | 1337 |
| LMArena German | 1406 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1416 | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | 1382 | 1278 |
| LMArena Russian | 1414 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1454 | 1353 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.5: 74.3 (#100)
- QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#196)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 58.3% | 83.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1413 | 1308 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.5: 57.7 (#121)
- QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1430 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1395 | 1288 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.4% | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1343 | 1257 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1415 | 1314 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.5 better than QwQ-32B?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is GLM-4.5 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.1 versus 34.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and QwQ-32B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.