Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.6V vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL leads GLM 4.6V on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.5 to 11.2, and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs 1.8x less per output token ($0.50 vs $0.90 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.6VZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.90
0
Nemotron 3.5 Super VLNVIDIA
Coding
No data
Overall
35.6
Output $/M
$0.50
3
vs boards won of 3 shared

GLM 4.6V or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL: which to pick

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

Pick GLM 4.6V for work measured by AA Intelligence Index or Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
3
GLM 4.6V only
35
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL only
13
Like-for-like categories
3 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 4.6V not benchmarked, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 21.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run): GLM 4.6V 9.6% against Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 30.7%, 21.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.6V $0.90 against Nemotron 3.5 Super VL $0.50 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.6V takes 131K tokens, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 1.05M.

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 4.6VBarsNemotron 3.5 Super VLTies
Intelligence01
Reasoning01
General01
All shared boards03
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index6 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
LiveBench codingNot measured65.5%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)41.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
SciCodeNot measured47.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)14.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: coding1389Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1391Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.226.5Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
LiveBench researchNot measured70.9%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
LiveBench browserNot measured4.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured15.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
τ²-Bench Telecom31.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
LiveBench reasoningNot measured78.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)71.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)9.6%30.7%Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
LMArena Text: hard prompts1367Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: expert1371Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1391Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1182Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: homework1155Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
AA Math Index85.3Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)85.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)79.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: science1389Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1389Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1393Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1359Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1173Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1149Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1110Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1128Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1154Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
LiveBench designNot measured60.7%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured64.6%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
IFBench30.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)48.7%69.0%Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
LMArena Text1376Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1350Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1347Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision1164Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: English1395Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: non-English1358Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1425Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: Russian1339Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1359Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1357Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1347Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1343Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: English1179Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1217Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1171Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1113Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
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 4.6V$0.0008Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL$0.0004Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.6V$0.018Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL$0.0090Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.6V$0.069Exceeds the context window
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL$0.035Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 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 4.6V and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.6VNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
MakerZ.aiNVIDIA
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 8, 2025October 15, 2026
Context window131K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.15
Output $/Mtok$0.90$0.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.6V better than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.6V for work measured by AA Intelligence Index or Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.6V or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL?

GLM 4.6V costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs $0.15 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.6V or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL?

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.6V vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.6V's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next