Model comparison
GLM-4.5V vs Qwen2-72B
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5V scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2-72B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.5V leads 36.8 to 21.2.
Side by side
| GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.2 | 29.5 |
| Released | 2025-08-11 | 2024-06-07 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 64K | — |
| Max output | 16K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.80 | — |
| Results tracked | 15 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 38.9 (#152), Qwen2-72B: 28.7 (#303)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1347 | 1196 |
| WeirdML | — | 11.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 38.5% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: —, Qwen2-72B: 16.9 (#138)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 1.1% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |
Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 26.5 (#118), Qwen2-72B: 22.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1335 | 1191 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 59.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.27 |
Math GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 34.7 (#157), Qwen2-72B: 27.9 (#232)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1353 | 1235 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |
Knowledge GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 36.8 (#155), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#270)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1353 | 1171 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.5V: 33.6 (#86), Qwen2-72B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1154 | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 44.9 (#172), Qwen2-72B: 36.0 (#239)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1304 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1338 | 1240 |
| LMArena Russian | 1299 | 1169 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1335 | 1168 |
| LMArena French | — | 1169 |
| LMArena German | — | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1083 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 69.4 (#170), Qwen2-72B: 62.0 (#236)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1311 | 1181 |
Long Context GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#166), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#230)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1305 | 1193 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.5V leads
GLM-4.5V: 52.7 (#162), Qwen2-72B: 41.0 (#236)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.5V | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1333 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1295 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1333 | 1195 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.5V better than Qwen2-72B?
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.5V or Qwen2-72B better for coding?
GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and Qwen2-72B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.