Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

GLM 5 leads Qwen3.5-122B-A10B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 27.9 to 17.7, and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs 1.5x less per output token ($2.08 vs $3.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 38 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5Z.ai
Coding
41.7
Overall
54.3
Output $/M
$3.20
35
Qwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.08
3
vs boards won of 38 shared

GLM 5 or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B: which to pick

Only GLM 5 has a coding score, 41.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3.5-122B-A10B for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($2.08 vs $3.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Shared results
38
GLM 5 only
38
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only
13
Like-for-like categories
7 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, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 10.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: HTML: GLM 5 1450 against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 1351, 16.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5 $3.20 against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B $2.08 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
GLM 5 takes 205K tokens, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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 5BarsQwen3.5-122B-A10BTies
Coding60
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning41
Math20
Knowledge40
General172
All shared boards353
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual69.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena WebDev14351361GLM 5
AA Coding IndexNot measured43.3Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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
SciCodeNot measured39.7%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.2%31.1%GLM 5
Terminal-Bench52.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
WeirdML48.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
ALE-Bench765.6Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: coding14611436GLM 5
LMArena Text: software and IT14601436GLM 5
LMArena WebDev: React14241353GLM 5
LMArena WebDev: HTML14501351GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AA Intelligence Index27.917.7GLM 5
Epoch Capabilities Index145.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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%93.6%GLM 5
Vending-Bench 2$4,432Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
GPQA Diamond83.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)82.0%85.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)29.3%25.2%GLM 5
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
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured17.0%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14521421GLM 5
LMArena Text: expert14541431GLM 5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14601431GLM 5
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1249Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1261Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark75.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AIME91.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
OTIS Mock AIME80.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: math14401431GLM 5
LMArena Text: mathematical work14511431GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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: science14601432GLM 5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14551423GLM 5
LMArena Text: legal and government14531422GLM 5
LMArena Text: business and finance14301414GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
Design Arena: websites1247Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1227Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1234Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1228Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1228Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1246Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
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
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index172
General benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
IFBench72.3%75.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)75.7%76.3%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
DTBenchNot measured84.3%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMCANot measured32.2%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
CL-bench18.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text14461417GLM 5
LMArena Text: instruction following14281399GLM 5
LMArena Text: creative writing14381368GLM 5
LMArena VisionNot measured1244Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: English14581428GLM 5
LMArena Text: non-English14301401GLM 5
LMArena Text: Chinese15111463GLM 5
LMArena Text: German14471425GLM 5
LMArena Text: Japanese14161367GLM 5
LMArena Text: Korean14231353GLM 5
LMArena Text: French14561443GLM 5
LMArena Text: Spanish14541425GLM 5
LMArena Text: Russian14361400GLM 5
LMArena Text: Polish14341398GLM 5
LMArena Text: multi-turn14561416GLM 5
LMArena Text: longer queries14461410GLM 5
LMArena Text: writing and language14371387GLM 5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14261366GLM 5
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1249Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1301Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1251Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1243Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1220Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.0013Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5$0.060Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.019Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5$0.232Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.073Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedFebruary 11, 2026February 25, 2026
Context window205K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.00$0.26
Output $/Mtok$3.20$2.08
Coding index41.7Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it31
Cost per solved task$0.63Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5 better than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B for coding?

Only GLM 5 has a coding score, 41.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.5-122B-A10B for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($2.08 vs $3.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5 or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

GLM 5 costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs $0.26 and $2.08. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5 or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B comparison based on?

38 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 5's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next