Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
GLM-5
75
Winner · 3/8 categoriesQwen3.5-35B-A3B
67
4/8 categoriesGLM-5· Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Pick GLM-5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you need the larger 262K context window.
GLM-5 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 75 to 67. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-5's sharpest advantage is in reasoning, where it averages 77 against 59. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is LiveCodeBench, 52% to 74.6%. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is the reasoning model in the pair, while GLM-5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 200K for GLM-5.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | GLM-5 | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| AgenticGLM-5 wins | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 56.2% | 40.5% |
| BrowseComp | 62% | 61% |
| OSWorld-Verified | 58% | 54.5% |
| tau2-bench | — | 81.2% |
| CodingQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins | ||
| HumanEval | 80% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified | 77.8% | 69.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | 52% | 74.6% |
| SWE-bench Pro | 46% | — |
| SWE-Rebench | 62.8% | — |
| React Native Evals | 74.2% | — |
| Multimodal & GroundedQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 66% | 75.1% |
| OfficeQA Pro | 73% | — |
| ReasoningGLM-5 wins | ||
| MuSR | 82% | — |
| BBH | 83% | — |
| LongBench v2 | 77% | 59% |
| MRCRv2 | 73% | — |
| KnowledgeQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins | ||
| MMLU | 91.7% | — |
| GPQA | 86% | 84.2% |
| SuperGPQA | 84% | 63.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | 82% | 85.3% |
| HLE | 30.5% | — |
| FrontierScience | 74% | — |
| SimpleQA | 84% | — |
| Instruction FollowingQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins | ||
| IFEval | 85% | 91.9% |
| MultilingualGLM-5 wins | ||
| MGSM | 84% | — |
| MMLU-ProX | 81% | 81% |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2023 | 88% | — |
| AIME 2024 | 90% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 93.3% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | 84% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 86% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | 85% | — |
| BRUMO 2025 | 87% | — |
| MATH-500 | 97.4% | — |
GLM-5 is ahead overall, 75 to 67. The biggest single separator in this matchup is LiveCodeBench, where the scores are 52% and 74.6%.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.3 versus 69.7. Inside this category, SuperGPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.6 versus 58.2. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GLM-5 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 77 versus 59. Inside this category, LongBench v2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GLM-5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 58.3 versus 50.5. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.1 versus 69.2. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 91.9 versus 85. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GLM-5 has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.1 versus 81. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.