# GLM-4.5V vs Qwen3 32B

> GLM-4.5V and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.8 vs 39.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-5v-vs-qwen3-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5V scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3 32B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.5V leads 27.4 to 20.2.
- GLM-4.5V is cheaper at $0.60 / $1.80 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
- Qwen3 32B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 64K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.8 | 39.2 |
| Rank | 158 | 172 |
| Context | 64K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | $1.80 | $2.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155)
- Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | 1358 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.5V: —
- Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119)
- Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 59.8% | 54.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1334 | 1334 |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |

## Math

- GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159)
- Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1354 | 1399 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156)
- Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1353 | 1362 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92)
- Qwen3 32B: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1154 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177)
- Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1303 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1337 | 1357 |
| LMArena Russian | 1298 | 1311 |
| LMArena German | — | 1341 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1336 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175)
- Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1311 | 1305 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171)
- Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1304 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170)
- Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1333 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1295 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1332 | 1331 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.5V better than Qwen3 32B?

GLM-4.5V and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.8 vs 39.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5V or Qwen3 32B?

GLM-4.5V is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $1.80 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

### Is GLM-4.5V or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 32B does, with 131K tokens against 64K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and Qwen3 32B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.