# GLM-4.6V vs Qwen-14B

> GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-6v-vs-qwen-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 9

## Summary

- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen-14B in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.6V leads 56.8 to 27.8.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 30.8 |
| Rank | 133 | 273 |
| Context | 128K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)
- Qwen-14B: 30.6 (#283)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1072 |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)
- Qwen-14B: 18.7 (#255)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1027 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 112.8 |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |

## Math

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Qwen-14B: 28.7 (#224)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1068 |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)
- Qwen-14B: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)
- Qwen-14B: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)
- Qwen-14B: 27.7 (#270)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1042 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1077 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)
- Qwen-14B: 52.6 (#284)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1031 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)
- Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#276)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1029 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)
- Qwen-14B: 27.8 (#294)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1022 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6V better than Qwen-14B?

GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is GLM-4.6V or Qwen-14B better for coding?

GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Qwen-14B share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.