# GLM-4.6V vs Mistral Nemo

> GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 26.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo 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-mistral-nemo
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.6V leads 56.6 to 28.5.
- Mistral Nemo is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 26.4 |
| Rank | 137 | 337 |
| Context | 128K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $0.15 |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | $0.15 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)
- Mistral Nemo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Mistral Nemo: 23.5 (#125)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 27.6% |
| BALROG | — | 17.6% |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)
- Mistral Nemo: 20.7 (#232)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | — |
| DTBench | — | 48.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.68 |
| PIQA | — | 83.5% |

## Math

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Mistral Nemo: 25.5 (#268)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | — | 10.8% |
| GSM8K | — | 84.2% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)
- Mistral Nemo: 12.3 (#298)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 29.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | — |
| BoolQ | — | 82.5% |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)
- Mistral Nemo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)
- Mistral Nemo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)
- Mistral Nemo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)
- Mistral Nemo: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)
- Mistral Nemo: 28.5 (#296)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 881 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6V better than Mistral Nemo?

GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 26.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo 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 Mistral Nemo?

Mistral Nemo is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 128K tokens.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Mistral Nemo share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Nemo has 10.