Model comparison
GLM-4.6 vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.6 #85 (Supported); Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct #186 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.6 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct share 4 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 10 results are unique to GLM-4.6; 0 to Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 4
- GLM-4.6 only
- 10
- Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for GLM-4.6 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
GLM-4.6 has the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | GLM-4.6 | Δ | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GLM-4.63.4 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GLM-4.6 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.6Not available | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct$0 input / $0 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.6Not available | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.6Not available | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.6200K | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct128K | GLM-4.6 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 76.9% | — | Not comparable |
Coding2 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 23.0% | 7.1% | GLM-4.6 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 63.2% | 41.7% | GLM-4.6 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 5.2% | 3.8% | GLM-4.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -31.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 20.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 66.1% | — | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 36.7% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare GLM-4.6 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for GLM-4.6 and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct today?
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.