llmrun

GLM 5 — Benchmarks

Benchmark scores for GLM 5 aggregated from public leaderboards (16 boards), with how it ranks among open models and how it compares with its nearest neighbours. See hardware requirements for what you need to run it.

llmrun Composite Score →

111.6

90% range 109.0–114.3 · from 14 boards

GLM 5 reasoning benchmarks

Multi-step logic and problem-solving — can the model think through a hard problem rather than recall an answer.

  • GPQA Diamond

    87.8%

    median 54.0%open leader 93.1%

    Overall best: Gemini 4 Argon (high) 96.4%

    85th percentile · #16 of 98 open · #70 of 300 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • ARC-AGI-2

    4.9%

    median 11.8%open leader 72.9%

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Max 95.0%

    42nd percentile · #12 of 19 open · #145 of 222 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • ARC-AGI

    44.7%

    median 65.3%open leader 94.5%

    Overall best: Claude Fable 5 (xhigh) 98.5%

    33rd percentile · #13 of 19 open · #146 of 232 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • SimpleBench

    53.2%

    median 40.8%open leader 61.1%

    Overall best: Claude Fable 5 Max 81.9%

    79th percentile · #6 of 25 open · #46 of 101 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • CL-bench

    18.7%

    median 15.9%open leader 19.3%

    Overall best: GPT 5.4 (Mar 05, 2026, xhigh) 27.9%

    83rd percentile · #2 of 7 open · #11 of 22 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • ForecastBench

    61.0

    median 58.1open leader 61.9

    Overall best: O3 (Apr 16, 2025, unspecified) 62.5

    92nd percentile · #3 of 26 open · #19 of 82 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • Vending-Bench 2

    4432.1

    median 2376.8open leader 8313.8

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra (unspecified) 15514.7

    63rd percentile · #7 of 17 open · #38 of 69 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

GLM 5 coding benchmarks

Writing, editing, and fixing real code — measured by whether the resulting program actually runs and passes tests.

  • SWE-bench Verified

    72.8%

    median 62.2%open leader 75.8%

    Overall best: live-SWE-agent + Claude 4.5 Opus medium (20251101) 79.2%

    95th percentile · #2 of 20 open · #27 of 162 all

    Independent

    SWE-bench ·

  • Terminal-Bench

    52.4%

    median 31.7%open leader

    Overall best: GPT 5.5 (unspecified) 84.7%

    top · #1 of 16 open · #22 of 57 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • SWE-bench Multilingual

    69.7%

    median 67.8%open leader

    Overall best: Gemini 3 Flash 72.7%

    top · #1 of 4 open · #4 of 13 all

    Independent

    SWE-bench ·

  • WeirdML

    48.2%

    median 39.5%open leader 82.6%

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Promax 93.6%

    77th percentile · #12 of 46 open · #75 of 162 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • ALE-Bench

    765.6

    median 694.1open leader 1524.5

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Max 2951.3

    57th percentile · #19 of 43 open · #76 of 122 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

Other results (1)leaderboard-only, not part of the llmrun Score
  • LMArena WebDev

    1435.4

    median 1411.4open leader 1655.2

    Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max) 1807.3

    55th percentile · #24 of 52 open · #80 of 138 all

    Arena

    Arena ·

GLM 5 math benchmarks

Symbolic and quantitative problem-solving, from competition math to multi-step calculation.

  • AIME 2024/2025

    80.0%

    median 52.8%open leader 98.6%

    Overall best: Claude Fable 5 (high) 100.0%

    72nd percentile · #25 of 86 open · #120 of 283 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

GLM 5 knowledge benchmarks

Breadth and depth of factual knowledge across many subjects, paired with the reasoning to apply it.

  • MMLU-Pro

    86.0%

    median 52.1%open leader 88.0%

    Overall best: Gemini-3.1-Pro 91.2%

    97th percentile · #6 of 145 open · #30 of 257 all

    Independent

    TIGER-Lab

GLM 5 instruction following benchmarks

How precisely a model obeys explicit, verifiable instructions — format, length, and content constraints — and, more broadly, how much people prefer its responses head-to-head in blind human voting.

  • LMArena Text

    1457.3

    median 1321.5open leader 1487.1

    Overall best: Gemini 4 Argon (High) 1523.9

    94th percentile · #12 of 187 open · #65 of 405 all

    Arena

    Arena ·

Score vs VRAM in the ≤512 GB tier

  • GLM 5
  • Other models
  • Best Score for its VRAM

#20 of 96 that fit ≤512 GB

Each dot is a model at the best quant that fits ≤512 GB. The line joins the models with the best Score for their VRAM; a dot below it is beaten by a model that needs no more memory.

Full ≤512 GB ranking →

GLM 5 vs its neighbours

Same boards for the nearest open models per llmrun Score. The highest score in each row is marked.

BoardGLM 5this modelQwen3.8 27Bbest in classQ4_K_M · 18 GBQwen3.5 397B A17Bnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 243 GBMiniMax M3nearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 258 GBDeepSeek V3.2nearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 413 GB
llmrun Score111.6122.1113.0112.5110.4
GPQA Diamond87.8%—86.4%90.9%—
ARC-AGI-24.9%42.4%——4.0%
ARC-AGI44.7%87.5%——57.0%
SimpleBench53.2%——45.8%—
CL-bench18.7%———12.4%
ForecastBench61.0——61.3—
Vending-Bench 24432.1——2157.8—
SWE-bench Verified72.8%———70.0%
Terminal-Bench52.4%———39.6%
SWE-bench Multilingual69.7%———59.0%
ALE-Bench765.6——640.0—
AIME 2024/202580.0%—88.9%71.1%—
MMLU-Pro86.0%—87.8%—85.0%
LMArena Text1457.31437.81441.61441.31424.6
Compare head to headCompareCompareCompareCompare

Scores aggregated from public benchmark sources (Epoch AI: 11 boards, Arena: 2 boards, SWE-bench: 2 boards, TIGER-Lab: 1 board) — each linked from the benchmark pages. llmrun does not run these benchmarks. Percentiles and ranks are among open models in the llmrun catalogue; the median and leader marks refer to the same field.