# GLM-4.6V vs Qwen3-30B-A3B

> GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-30B-A3B costs 2.1× 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-qwen3-30b-a3b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3-30B-A3B in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where GLM-4.6V leads 41.3 to 31.0.
- Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.
- GLM-4.6V accepts more context: 128K tokens versus 41K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 38.9 |
| Rank | 137 | 179 |
| Context | 128K | 41K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $0.12 |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | $0.50 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1416 |
| SciCode | — | 33.3% |
| WeirdML | — | 29.8% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41.4% |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1398 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 8% |
| DTBench | — | 69.3% |
| LMCA | — | 22.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 139.63 |

## Math

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 47.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 70.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1394 |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | 1396 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 70.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 12.3% |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1372 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | 1433 |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | 1370 |
| LMArena French | — | 1418 |
| LMArena German | — | 1380 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1337 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1331 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1404 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1363 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1379 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 40.6% |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1384 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1317 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | 1378 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 75.3% |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6V better than Qwen3-30B-A3B?

GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-30B-A3B costs 2.1× 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 Qwen3-30B-A3B?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.

### Is GLM-4.6V or Qwen3-30B-A3B better for coding?

GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.9 versus 37.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.6V does, with 128K tokens against 41K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Qwen3-30B-A3B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32.