Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Grok 3
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 39.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 3 categories and Grok 3 in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.6V leads 26.5 to 13.8.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 39.6 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2025-04-09 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 40 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 3 leads
GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128), Grok 3: 41.5 (#113)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1432 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 53.3% |
| WeirdML | — | 37.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Grok 3: 30.2 (#69)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 29.5% |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), Grok 3: 13.8 (#322)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1433 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | — | 36.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 61.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 5.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.34 |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Grok 3: 36.2 (#122)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 55.6% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 46.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1390 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 88.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 3.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Grok 3 leads
GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), Grok 3: 46.0 (#76)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1420 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 75.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 78.8% |
| Confabulations | — | 14.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 65% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), Grok 3: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual Grok 3 leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), Grok 3: 52.5 (#81)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1411 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1448 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1416 |
| LMArena French | — | 1460 |
| LMArena German | — | 1431 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1374 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1417 |
Instruction Following Grok 3 leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), Grok 3: 75.2 (#69)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1409 |
| IFEval | — | 88.4% |
Long Context GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), Grok 3: 38.7 (#187)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1439 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 58.3% |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), Grok 3: 56.0 (#136)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1426 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1414 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1424 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 76.4% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1186 |
| WildBench | — | 84.9% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Grok 3?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 39.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.6V or Grok 3 better for coding?
Grok 3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.5 versus 40.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Grok 3 share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Grok 3 has 40.