GLM 4.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads GLM 4.5 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.9 to 12.8, and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs 15.0x less per output token ($0.147 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 6 benchmarks have a result for both.
GLM 4.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: which to pick
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.5 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick GLM 4.5 for work measured by GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) or Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 6
- GLM 4.5 only
- 55
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only
- 14
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads, 12.9 against 12.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a AA Agentic Index result, 3.5.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GLM 4.5 has a GPQA Diamond result, 72.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only GLM 4.5 has a AIME result, 86.7%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GLM 4.5 has a MMLU Pro result, 81.2%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only GLM 4.5 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1170.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning takes 262K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
GLM 4.5 $0.0017, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has the number, $0.06.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GLM 4.5 not benchmarked, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 22.6 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Coding, 14.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- ALE-Bench: GLM 4.5 344.8 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 769.2, 14.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GLM 4.5 $2.20 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.147 per million output tokens, 15.0x apart.
- Context window
- GLM 4.5 takes 131K tokens, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 262K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | GLM 4.5 | Bars | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 0 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 3 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 64.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 26.8 | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 67.5% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.8% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 3.0% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 10.9% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 29.5% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 73.8% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 32.1% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 344.8 | 769.2 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1434 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1440 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 12.8 | 12.9 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 3.5 | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 18.5% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 2.6% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 2.9% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 17.0% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 43.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 72.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 78.2% | 74.3% | GLM 4.5 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 13.0% | 10.6% | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1429 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1433 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1429 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 86.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 94.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 90.8% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| AA Math Index | 73.7 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 73.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1427 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1430 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 81.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 75.6% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 61.0% | 54.2% | GLM 4.5 |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 72.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 90.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.5% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1444 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1455 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1438 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1420 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1170 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1144 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1145 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1159 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1170 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1165 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1096 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 4.3% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| IFBench | 44.1% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 52.7% | 60.3% | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 73.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1430 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1404 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1395 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1437 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1417 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1465 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1407 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1415 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1380 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1418 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1454 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1413 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1422 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1415 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1412 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1403 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1404 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Z.ai GLM 4.5 | NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Z.ai | NVIDIA |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | July 25, 2025 | August 11, 2026 |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.60 | $0.0534 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.20 | $0.147 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 22.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.06 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GLM 4.5 better than Nemotron 3.5 Lightning for coding?
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.5 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 for work measured by GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) or Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?
GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.0534 and $0.147. Cost per solved task is known for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only.
Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning comparison based on?
6 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.5's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.