# GLM-4.6 vs Qwen Max

> GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-6-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen Max in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.6 leads 39.1 to 22.3.
- GLM-4.6 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- GLM-4.6 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 33K.
- GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 34.7 |
| Rank | 135 | 230 |
| Context | 205K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | $6.40 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148)
- Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1449 | 1288 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 55.4% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1340 | — |
| SciCode | 38.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 340.82 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66)
- Qwen Max: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 24.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 72.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172)
- Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1440 | 1269 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 47.4% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111)
- Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1432 | 1275 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 3.8% | 1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 16.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1431 | 1248 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66)
- Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1426 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1499 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1459 | 1330 |
| LMArena German | 1447 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1393 | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | 1419 | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1436 | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98)
- Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1410 | 1262 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94)
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1288 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90)
- Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1440 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1427 | 1277 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1411 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6 better than Qwen Max?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or Qwen Max?

GLM-4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

### Is GLM-4.6 or Qwen Max better for coding?

GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.6 does, with 205K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Qwen Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.