# GLM-4.6V vs Llama 4 Scout

> GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 27.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-6v-vs-llama-4-scout
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 4 Scout in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.6V leads 40.2 to 19.9.
- Llama 4 Scout is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 27.4 |
| Rank | 133 | 323 |
| Context | 128K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | $0.30 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)
- Llama 4 Scout: 19.9 (#334)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1286 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9.1% |
| SciCode | — | 17% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 43.1% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Llama 4 Scout: 24.4 (#109)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.1% |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)
- Llama 4 Scout: 9.2 (#339)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1266 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 36.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 0.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| DTBench | — | 57.9% |
| LMCA | — | 12% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 129.64 |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.5 |

## Math

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Llama 4 Scout: 18.4 (#280)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.8% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 37.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1286 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 62.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)
- Llama 4 Scout: 31.8 (#208)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1236 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 51.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 74.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 50.7% |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)
- Llama 4 Scout: 31.6 (#98)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | 1118 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 34.2% |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)
- Llama 4 Scout: 41.3 (#207)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1253 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1256 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1263 |
| LMArena French | — | 1283 |
| LMArena German | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1209 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1277 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)
- Llama 4 Scout: 66.0 (#212)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1248 |
| IFEval | — | 81.8% |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)
- Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#289)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1265 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 36% |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)
- Llama 4 Scout: 37.1 (#256)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1279 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1249 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1281 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 783 |
| WildBench | — | 78% |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6V better than Llama 4 Scout?

GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 27.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.

### Is GLM-4.6V or Llama 4 Scout better for coding?

GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 19.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 128K tokens.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Llama 4 Scout share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Scout has 43.