Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GLM-5.1
82
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
59
Verified leaderboard positions: GLM-5.1 #28 · Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking unranked
Pick GLM-5.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Coding
+9.0 difference
Knowledge
+5.3 difference
GLM-5.1
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
$1.4 / $4.4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
203K
128K
Pick GLM-5.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
GLM-5.1 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 82 to 59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-5.1 gives you the larger context window at 203K, compared with 128K for Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking.
GLM-5.1 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 82 to 59.
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 57.6 versus 52.3. Inside this category, GPQA-D is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 69.9 versus 60.9. GLM-5.1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.