Model comparison
GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-1.7B
GLM-4.5-Air is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.5-Air leads 36.2 to 16.3.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.9 | 26.6 |
| Released | 2025-07-20 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | — |
| Max output | 98K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.10 | — |
| Results tracked | 27 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GLM-4.5-Air: 33.3 (#259), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GSO | 2.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1397 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.5-Air: —, Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.4% |
Reasoning GLM-4.5-Air leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 24.1 (#166), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 43% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1379 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.2 | — |
Math GLM-4.5-Air leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 36.2 (#170), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 39.1% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1396 | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.5-Air leads
GLM-4.5-Air: 35.0 (#191), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 38% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 76.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 59.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1370 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.5-Air: 49.1 (#135), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | — |
| LMArena French | 1399 | — |
| LMArena German | 1377 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1348 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1386 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.5-Air: 69.6 (#171), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 81.2% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1354 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.5-Air: 41.6 (#135), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1366 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-4.5-Air: 55.9 (#139), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1384 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1343 | — |
| WildBench | 78.9% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1371 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5-Air better than Qwen3-1.7B?
GLM-4.5-Air is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5-Air and Qwen3-1.7B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5-Air has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.