Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5 vs Ministral 3 14B 2512

GLM 5 leads Ministral 3 14B 2512 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 27.9 to 6.0, and Ministral 3 14B 2512 costs 16.0x less per output token ($0.20 vs $3.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5Z.ai
Coding
41.7
Overall
54.3
Output $/M
$3.20
5
Ministral 3 14B 2512Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
0
vs boards won of 5 shared

GLM 5 or Ministral 3 14B 2512: which to pick

Only GLM 5 has a coding score, 41.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Ministral 3 14B 2512 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Ministral 3 14B 2512 for output tokens 16.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $3.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Shared results
5
GLM 5 only
71
Ministral 3 14B 2512 only
2
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 5 41.7 from 3 benchmarks, Ministral 3 14B 2512 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 24.5 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: 3D: GLM 5 1228 against Ministral 3 14B 2512 989, 29.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5 $3.20 against Ministral 3 14B 2512 $0.20 per million output tokens, 16.0x apart.
Context window
GLM 5 takes 205K tokens, Ministral 3 14B 2512 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGLM 5BarsMinistral 3 14B 2512Ties
Intelligence10
Web design40
All shared boards50
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index15 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual69.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena WebDev1435Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured14.4Only Ministral 3 14B 2512 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)71.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)23.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Terminal-Bench52.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
WeirdML48.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
ALE-Bench765.6Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: coding1461Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1460Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1424Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1450Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
AA Intelligence Index27.96.0GLM 5
Epoch Capabilities Index145.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.1Only Ministral 3 14B 2512 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1123Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1136Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1147Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1144Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1098Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom98.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$4,432Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
GPQA Diamond83.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)82.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)29.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)87.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
ARC-AGI44.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
ARC-AGI-24.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
SimpleBench53.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1452Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: expert1454Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1460Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark75.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
AIME91.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
OTIS Mock AIME80.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: math1440Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1451Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
MMLU Pro86.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)52.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)62.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)70.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)94.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: science1460Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1455Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1453Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1430Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
Design Arena: websites12471081GLM 5
Design Arena: UI components1227Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: game dev12341037GLM 5
Design Arena: data viz1228Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1228989GLM 5
Design Arena: all code categories12461064GLM 5
Design Arena: SVG1168Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1147Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
IFBench72.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)75.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
CL-bench18.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text1446Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1428Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1438Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: English1458Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1430Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1511Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: German1447Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1416Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1423Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: French1456Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1454Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1436Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1434Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1456Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1446Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1437Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1426Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
BenchmarkGLM 5Ministral 3 14B 2512Leader
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 5$0.0026Fits in one request
Ministral 3 14B 2512$0.0003Fits in one request

Ministral 3 14B 2512 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5$0.060Fits in one request
Ministral 3 14B 2512$0.011Fits in one request

Ministral 3 14B 2512 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5$0.232Exceeds the context window
Ministral 3 14B 2512$0.042Fits in one request

Ministral 3 14B 2512 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 5 and Ministral 3 14B 2512
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5Mistral Ministral 3 14B 2512
MakerZ.aiMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedFebruary 11, 2026December 2, 2025
Context window205K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.00$0.20
Output $/Mtok$3.20$0.20
Coding index41.7Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.63Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5 better than Ministral 3 14B 2512 for coding?

Only GLM 5 has a coding score, 41.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Ministral 3 14B 2512 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Ministral 3 14B 2512 for output tokens 16.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $3.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5 or Ministral 3 14B 2512?

GLM 5 costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; Ministral 3 14B 2512 costs $0.20 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5 or Ministral 3 14B 2512?

Ministral 3 14B 2512, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5 vs Ministral 3 14B 2512 comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 5's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Ministral 3 14B 2512's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next