# GLM-5 vs Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct

> GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.9 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-5-vs-qwen2-5-vl-72b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where GLM-5 leads 30.9 to 18.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 75% for GLM-5 and 36% for Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct.
- GLM-5 is cheaper at $1 / $3.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2.80 / $8.40 for Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct.
- GLM-5 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 45.9 | 29.4 |
| Rank | 59 | 298 |
| Context | 205K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $1 | $2.80 |
| Output $/M | $3.20 | $8.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-5: 49.0 (#47)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 72.1% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 72.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1434 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 69.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 48.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1461 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 765.62 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-5: 30.9 (#65)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 18.4 (#136)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 52.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 82.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 9.8% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 73.7% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 86.8% | — |
| OSWorld | — | 5% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,432 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-5: 27.6 (#100)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 20.0 (#228)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75% | 36% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 53.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 74.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 44.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 10% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1451 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.84 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |

## Math

- GLM-5: 44.8 (#66)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 65.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 80% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1440 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 16.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-5: 52.2 (#59)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 87.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1454 | — |

## Multimodal

- GLM-5: —
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 32.9 (#92)

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1107 |
| Video-MME | — | 73.5% |
| GeoBench | — | 62% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 33.3% |

## Multilingual

- GLM-5: 53.9 (#57)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1430 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1511 | — |
| LMArena French | 1455 | — |
| LMArena German | 1445 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1416 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1421 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1436 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1452 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-5: 75.4 (#64)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1427 | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-5: 44.6 (#58)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 18.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1446 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-5: 66.2 (#38)
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1438 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1601 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-5 better than Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.9 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-5 or Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

GLM-5 is cheaper. It lists at $1 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct lists at $2.80 and $8.40.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5 does, with 205K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-5 and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5 has 45 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has 6.