Noometry

Model comparison

Command A vs GLM-4.5-Air

GLM-4.5-Air is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Command A Cohere

35.9

Rank #212 Confirmed

GLM-4.5-Air Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.7

Rank #169 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 1 category and GLM-4.5-Air in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.5-Air leads 56.1 to 47.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 28.8% for Command A and 43% for GLM-4.5-Air.
  • GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.10 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
  • Command A accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Command AGLM-4.5-Air
ProviderCohereZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index35.938.7
Released2025-03-132025-07-20
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window256K131K
Max output8K98K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$0.20
Output $ / M tokens$10$1.10
Results tracked2427

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.5-Air leads

Command A: 26.8 (#317), GLM-4.5-Air: 34.5 (#225)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Coding13311397
Aider Polyglot12%—
GSO—2.9%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Command A: 35.7 (#36), GLM-4.5-Air: —

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard57.1%—

Reasoning GLM-4.5-Air leads

Command A: 17.7 (#276), GLM-4.5-Air: 23.3 (#166)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
Kagi LLM Benchmark28.8%43%
LMArena Hard Prompts13261379
DTBench61.3%—
LMCA10.3%—
ForecastBench—59.2

Math Too close to call

Command A: 33.5 (#172), GLM-4.5-Air: 33.8 (#166)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Math13001396
Omni-MATH—39.1%

Knowledge Command A leads

Command A: 36.5 (#157), GLM-4.5-Air: 34.6 (#184)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.3%9.3%
LMArena Expert12951370
Humanity's Last Exam—8.1%
MMLU-Pro—76.2%
GPQA (HELM)—59.4%

Multilingual GLM-4.5-Air leads

Command A: 45.5 (#166), GLM-4.5-Air: 49.4 (#130)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Non-English13131366
LMArena Chinese13271427
LMArena French13521399
LMArena German13411376
LMArena Japanese12831348
LMArena Korean12851306
LMArena Russian13141373
LMArena Spanish13461385

Instruction Following Too close to call

Command A: 69.3 (#172), GLM-4.5-Air: 69.8 (#165)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Instruction Following13091353
IFEval—81.2%

Long Context GLM-4.5-Air leads

Command A: 40.6 (#147), GLM-4.5-Air: 41.6 (#130)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Longer Query13341367

Writing & Preference GLM-4.5-Air leads

Command A: 47.8 (#204), GLM-4.5-Air: 56.1 (#134)

BenchmarkCommand AGLM-4.5-Air
LMArena Text13311384
LMArena Creative Writing13191343
LMArena Multi-Turn13381371
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1145—
WildBench—78.9%

Frequently asked questions

Is Command A better than GLM-4.5-Air?

GLM-4.5-Air is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.7 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command A or GLM-4.5-Air?

GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.

Is Command A or GLM-4.5-Air better for coding?

GLM-4.5-Air scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.5 versus 26.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Command A does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Command A and GLM-4.5-Air share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5-Air has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper