Model comparison
DBRX vs GLM-5
GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.9 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
DatabricksSummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. DBRX scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5 leads 52.2 to 14.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 32.9% for DBRX and 87.8% for GLM-5.
Side by side
| DBRX | GLM-5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Databricks | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 29.0 | 45.9 |
| Released | 2024-03-27 | 2026-02-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3.20 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 45 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5 leads
DBRX: 32.3 (#262), GLM-5: 49.0 (#47)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1132 | 1461 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 72.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 72.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1434 |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 69.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 48.2% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 765.62 |
| HumanEval+ | 70.1% | — |
| MBPP+ | 55.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DBRX: —, GLM-5: 30.9 (#65)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 52.4% |
| τ²-bench Airline | — | 82.5% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 9.8% |
| τ²-bench Retail | — | 73.7% |
| τ²-bench Telecom | — | 86.8% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,432 |
Reasoning GLM-5 leads
DBRX: 20.5 (#218), GLM-5: 27.6 (#100)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | 1451 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| SimpleBench | — | 53.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 75% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 44.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 10% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 145.84 |
| ForecastBench | — | 61 |
Math GLM-5 leads
DBRX: 22.3 (#265), GLM-5: 44.8 (#66)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1145 | 1440 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 65.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 80% |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 16.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge GLM-5 leads
DBRX: 14.9 (#289), GLM-5: 52.2 (#59)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 32.9% | 87.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1076 | 1454 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.1% |
Multilingual GLM-5 leads
DBRX: 29.4 (#263), GLM-5: 53.9 (#57)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1071 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1068 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1095 | 1455 |
| LMArena German | 1057 | 1445 |
| LMArena Japanese | 990 | 1416 |
| LMArena Korean | 993 | 1421 |
| LMArena Russian | 1078 | 1436 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1064 | 1452 |
Instruction Following GLM-5 leads
DBRX: 57.7 (#265), GLM-5: 75.4 (#64)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1112 | 1427 |
Long Context GLM-5 leads
DBRX: 33.7 (#253), GLM-5: 44.6 (#58)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1112 | 1446 |
| CL-bench | — | 18.7% |
Writing & Preference GLM-5 leads
DBRX: 33.7 (#271), GLM-5: 66.2 (#38)
| Benchmark | DBRX | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1119 | 1446 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1104 | 1438 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1111 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1601 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DBRX better than GLM-5?
GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.9 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is DBRX or GLM-5 better for coding?
GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DBRX and GLM-5 share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. DBRX has 21 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5 has 45.