Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5V vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct

Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs 1.8x less per output token than GLM 4.5V ($1.00 vs $1.80 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.5VZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.80
3
Qwen2.5 VL 72B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
0
vs boards won of 3 shared

GLM 4.5V or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
3
GLM 4.5V only
38
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct only
3
Like-for-like categories
2 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.

At a glance

Coding index
GLM 4.5V not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 23.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Kagi LLM Benchmark: GLM 4.5V 59.8% against Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 36.0%, 23.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5V $1.80 against Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5V takes 66K tokens, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 128K.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGLM 4.5VBarsQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructTies
Reasoning10
General20
All shared boards30
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)60.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)6.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: coding1347Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1353Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.6Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom22.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
OSWorldNot measured5.0%Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)68.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)6.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1335Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: expert1353Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1357Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1151Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: homework1163Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark59.8%36.0%GLM 4.5V
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
AA Math Index73.0Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: math1354Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1336Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)78.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
GeoBenchNot measured62.0%Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science1330Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1349Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1338Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1309Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
IFBench34.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)0.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text1333Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1311Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1294Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision11541107GLM 4.5V
LMArena Text: English1362Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: non-English1303Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1337Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1336Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: Russian1298Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: Polish1302Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1333Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1305Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1302Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1303Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: English11831115GLM 4.5V
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1107Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1151Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
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

GLM 4.5V$0.0015Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.0013Fits in one request

Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5V$0.035Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.043Fits in one request

GLM 4.5V costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5V$0.138Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.170Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.5V 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.

Specifications of GLM 4.5V and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5VQwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 11, 2025February 1, 2025
Context window66K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.80
Output $/Mtok$1.80$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5V better than Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5V or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?

GLM 4.5V costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $1.80 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs $0.80 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5V or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct, with 128K tokens against 66K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5V vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.5V's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next