# GLM-4.6V vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview

> Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-6v-vs-qwen3-6-max-preview
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 57.6 to 38.0.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $1.30 / $7.80 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 51.5 |
| Rank | 137 | 43 |
| Context | 128K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $1.30 |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | $7.80 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.7 (#54)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1471 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1482 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,254 |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 41.7 (#53)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1457 |
| SimpleBench | — | 63% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 19% |
| DTBench | — | 87.2% |
| LMCA | — | 42.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.24 |

## Math

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.1 (#46)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1465 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 23.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#39)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | 1478 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 52% |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.2 (#48)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1437 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | 1487 |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | 1445 |
| LMArena French | — | 1449 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1454 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.7 (#55)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1438 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#61)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1457 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 63.8 (#60)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | 1456 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6V better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Max Preview lists at $1.30 and $7.80.

### Is GLM-4.6V or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview does, with 262K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.