Model comparison
GLM-4.5 vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10B
GLM-4.5 and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.0 vs 42.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads 43.0 to 38.2.
- GLM-4.5 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $3.20 for Qwen3.5 122B-A10B.
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.0 | 42.1 |
| Released | 2025-07-27 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Max output | 98K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | $3.20 |
| Results tracked | 27 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.5 leads
GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.1 (#162)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1434 | 1436 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 54.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1360 |
| SciCode | — | 35.6% |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 344.82 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.52 | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.5 leads
GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 27.2 (#123)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1429 | 1421 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 51.7% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 51.2% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| DTBench | — | 84.3% |
| LMCA | — | 32.2% |
Math Too close to call
GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1427 | 1432 |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 38.8 (#142)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1433 | 1432 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.2% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.5: —, Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.6 (#57)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1245 |
Multilingual GLM-4.5 leads
GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 51.6 (#107)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1400 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1462 |
| LMArena French | 1418 | 1442 |
| LMArena German | 1407 | 1426 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1415 | 1367 |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | 1352 |
| LMArena Russian | 1414 | 1400 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1454 | 1424 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 73.8 (#115)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 1399 |
Long Context Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 43.0 (#109)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1412 | 1410 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 58.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 60.0 (#105)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1430 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1395 | 1368 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1415 | 1416 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.4% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1343 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5 better than Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?
GLM-4.5 and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.0 vs 42.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5 or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?
GLM-4.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 122B-A10B lists at $0.40 and $3.20.
Is GLM-4.5 or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B better for coding?
GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 122B-A10B does, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has 27.