# GLM-4.5V vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

> GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-5v-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-think
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5V scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.5V leads 44.9 to 38.3.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 39.2 | 37.3 |
| Rank | 158 | 191 |
| Context | 64K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | — |
| Output $/M | $1.80 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.5V: 38.9 (#152)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | 1292 |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.5V: 26.5 (#118)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1335 | 1272 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 59.8% | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.5V: 34.7 (#157)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1353 | 1305 |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.5V: 36.8 (#155)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1353 | 1294 |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.5V: 33.6 (#86)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1154 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.5V: 44.9 (#172)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1304 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1338 | 1241 |
| LMArena Russian | 1299 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1335 | 1288 |
| LMArena French | — | 1262 |
| LMArena German | — | 1260 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.5V: 69.4 (#170)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1311 | 1246 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#166)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1305 | 1272 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.5V: 52.7 (#162)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1333 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1295 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1333 | 1252 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.5V better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is GLM-4.5V or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.