Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.5 vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #122 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

47.5

Rank #62 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 Plus in 7 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 56.1 to 35.9.
  • GLM-4.5 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Qwen3.6 Plus.
  • Qwen3.6 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • GLM-4.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.047.5
Released2025-07-272026-03-31
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window131K1M
Max output98K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.50
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$3
Results tracked2737

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Coding14341467
ALE-Bench344.82670.15
SWE-bench Verified—57.9%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)54.2%—
LMArena WebDev—1461
SciCode—40.7%
WeirdML40.6%—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.5: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
Vending-Bench 2—5,115

Reasoning Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts14291449
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)—60.3%
CritPt—2.9%
Chess Puzzles—17%
Thematic Generalization—59.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—12%
DTBench—81.9%
LMCA—33.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.65

Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Math14271450
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—38.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—26.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—8.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Expert14331454
GPQA Diamond—88.4%
Humanity's Last Exam8.3%—
SimpleQA Verified—44.1%
Confabulations11.3%—

Multilingual Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Non-English14171424
LMArena Chinese14651477
LMArena French14181455
LMArena German14071452
LMArena Japanese14151389
LMArena Korean13801379
LMArena Russian14141434
LMArena Spanish14541432

Instruction Following Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following14041425

Long Context Qwen3.6 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Longer Query14121439
Fiction.LiveBench58.3%—
CL-bench—20.3%

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads

GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text14301437
LMArena Creative Writing13951404
LMArena Multi-Turn14151438
Short-Story Creative Writing73.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1343—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5 better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5 or Qwen3.6 Plus?

GLM-4.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus lists at $0.50 and $3.

Is GLM-4.5 or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (41.4 vs 40.8); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper