Qwen3.5vsGLM-5.1
Qwen3.5 | GLM-5.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | 397B | 744B |
Context window | 1M | 200k |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | — | 22% |
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 76.4% | — |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | 69.3% | — |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | — | 75% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | 52.5% | 63.5%Best |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 69%Best | 68% |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 28.7% | — |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | — | 52.3% |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 88.4%Best | 86.2% |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 62.2% | — |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 80.8% | — |
Multimodal reasoning MMMU-ProA tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | 79% | — |
Multimodal MMMUTests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | 85% | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | — | 1518 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | Z.ai |
| Release date | Feb 16 2026 | Apr 7 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
Which is better: Qwen3.5 or GLM-5.1?
Qwen3.5 leads GLM-5.1 on 2 of the 3 benchmarks they both report (Terminal-Bench 2.0, BrowseComp, GPQA Diamond). Qwen3.5 shipped 50 days before GLM-5.1, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Qwen3.5 has 397B parameters, while GLM-5.1 has 744B. Context windows are 1M (Qwen3.5) vs 200k (GLM-5.1).
On Terminal-Bench 2.0, GLM-5.1 leads at 63.5% vs Qwen3.5 at 52.5%. On BrowseComp, Qwen3.5 leads at 69% vs GLM-5.1 at 68%. On GPQA Diamond, Qwen3.5 leads at 88.4% vs GLM-5.1 at 86.2%.
Frequently asked questions
Qwen3.5 was released by Qwen on Feb 16 2026.
GLM-5.1 was released by Z.ai on Apr 7 2026.
GLM-5.1 leads on Terminal-Bench 2.0 — Qwen3.5 52.5% vs GLM-5.1 63.5%.
Qwen3.5 leads on GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.5 88.4% vs GLM-5.1 86.2%.
Qwen3.5 has a 1M context window; GLM-5.1 has 200k.