# GLM-5.1 vs Magistral Small

> GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Small costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-5-1-vs-magistral-small
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 6

## Summary

- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 4 categories and Magistral Small in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.1 leads 38.2 to 6.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 93.3% for GLM-5.1 and 30% for Magistral Small.
- Magistral Small is cheaper at $0.50 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
- GLM-5.1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 47.6 | 29.9 |
| Rank | 51 | 289 |
| Context | 200K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $1.40 | $0.50 |
| Output $/M | $4.40 | $1.50 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-5.1: 48.5 (#52)
- Magistral Small: 37.8 (#172)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 43.8% | 35.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1509 | — |
| WeirdML | 57.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1486 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106)
- Magistral Small: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57)
- Magistral Small: 6.9 (#345)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 4.6% | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | 3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.86 | 133.19 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 6.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 5% |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | — |
| DTBench | — | 61.3% |

## Math

- GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48)
- Magistral Small: 24.9 (#253)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | 30% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 22.2% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1472 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45)
- Magistral Small: 30.9 (#215)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | 56.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1477 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34)
- Magistral Small: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1516 | — |
| LMArena French | 1478 | — |
| LMArena German | 1466 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1436 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1423 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1453 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1467 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41)
- Magistral Small: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51)
- Magistral Small: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1467 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29)
- Magistral Small: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1462 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1473 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-5.1 better than Magistral Small?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Small costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or Magistral Small?

Magistral Small is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

### Is GLM-5.1 or Magistral Small better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.1 does, with 200K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Magistral Small share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Small has 10.