Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs GLM-4.6V

GLM-4.6 and GLM-4.6V score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.4 vs 41.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

GLM-4.6V Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.3

Rank #137 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 5 categories and GLM-4.6V in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.6 leads 53.5 to 48.6.
  • GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.6.
  • GLM-4.6 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

GLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Z.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index41.441.3
Released2025-09-302025-12-08
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K128K
Max output131K33K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$0.90
Results tracked2912

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Coding14491390
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)55.4%—
LMArena WebDev1340—
SciCode38.4%—
ALE-Bench340.82—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), GLM-4.6V: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
Terminal-Bench24.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard72.4%—

Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads

GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Hard Prompts14401368
Kagi LLM Benchmark47.4%—
CritPt1.1%—

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), GLM-4.6V: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Math1432—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)3.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124), GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Expert14311371
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.5%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.6: —, GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Vision—1164

Multilingual GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Non-English14261359
LMArena Chinese14991425
LMArena Russian14191340
LMArena French1459—
LMArena German1447—
LMArena Japanese1393—
LMArena Korean1400—
LMArena Spanish1436—

Instruction Following GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Instruction Following14101352

Long Context GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Longer Query14221358

Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads

GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)

BenchmarkGLM-4.6GLM-4.6V
LMArena Text14401377
LMArena Creative Writing14111347
LMArena Multi-Turn14271360
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1411—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6 better than GLM-4.6V?

GLM-4.6 and GLM-4.6V score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.4 vs 41.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or GLM-4.6V?

GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Is GLM-4.6 or GLM-4.6V better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (40.1 vs 40.9); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.6 does, with 205K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and GLM-4.6V share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper