Qwen3.6vsGLM-4.7
Qwen3.6 | GLM-4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | 35B | — |
Context window | 256k | 128k |
| Benchmarks | ||
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 49.5% | — |
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. | 73.4% | 73.8%Best |
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. | 67.2% | — |
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. | 51.5%Best | 41% |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | — | 52% |
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. | 21.4% | 24.8%Best |
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. | — | 42.8% |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 86%Best | 85.7% |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 78% | — |
Multimodal reasoning MMMU-ProA tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | 75.3% | — |
Multimodal MMMUTests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | 81.7% | — |
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. | — | 1433 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | Z.ai |
| Release date | Apr 16 2026 | Dec 22 2025 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
Which is better: Qwen3.6 or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.6 and GLM-4.7 are evenly matched across the 4 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond). GLM-4.7 shipped 115 days before Qwen3.6, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 256k (Qwen3.6) vs 128k (GLM-4.7).
On SWE-Bench Verified, GLM-4.7 leads at 73.8% vs Qwen3.6 at 73.4%. On Terminal-Bench 2.0, Qwen3.6 leads at 51.5% vs GLM-4.7 at 41%. On Humanity's Last Exam · no tools, GLM-4.7 leads at 24.8% vs Qwen3.6 at 21.4%. On GPQA Diamond, Qwen3.6 leads at 86% vs GLM-4.7 at 85.7%.
Frequently asked questions
Qwen3.6 was released by Qwen on Apr 16 2026.
GLM-4.7 was released by Z.ai on Dec 22 2025.
GLM-4.7 leads on SWE-Bench Verified — Qwen3.6 73.4% vs GLM-4.7 73.8%.
GLM-4.7 leads on Humanity's Last Exam · no tools — Qwen3.6 21.4% vs GLM-4.7 24.8%.
Qwen3.6 has a 256k context window; GLM-4.7 has 128k.