UnifyBench

RankingGLM-5

GLM-5

Data updated 12 Sept 2026

7 published benchmark measures · 5 benchmark families contribute across 4 task areas. 3 capability estimates available in the full profile. See all results ↓ · Compare published benchmarks →

Model evidence summary

Choose a configuration

A model-wide score would mix effort settings. This page summarizes published evidence; only identified configurations receive leaderboard ranks.

Compare measured configurations →

The capability chart summarizes evidence across reported settings, not a runnable configuration or a leaderboard rank.

Performance profile

Capabilities

Adjusted comparison score · 0–100
GLM-5 capability radarComparison scores from 0 to 100. Unknown capabilities have no point; lines stop at gaps. Hollow points are preliminary. Exact values and support labels follow the chart.AgenticHard reasoningCodingHuman prefKnowledgeMultimodalLong context50100GLM-5 · Hard reasoning: 35.3 · SupportedGLM-5 · Coding: 3.5 · PreliminaryGLM-5 · Human pref: 32.5 · Supported

Filled points are supported; hollow points are preliminary. Lines stop at unknown capabilities. Exact values and sources follow below.

AgenticNo comparable evidenceUnknown

0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 11/11 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 15/15 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

Audit: family and publisher holdouts improved on neutral predictions within evaluated coverage; source sensitivity still requires inspection. Validation audit.

Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

    Hard reasoning2 families · 1 with independent evidence · Supported35.3

    2 core families; 49 direct opponents across 11 labs.

    Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

    Refit without one family: 28.5–41.2; 2/7 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: 25.8–41.6; 2/16 unsupported. Smoothing check: 23.9–44.9; 0/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

    Audit: family and publisher holdouts improved on neutral predictions within evaluated coverage. Validation audit.

    Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

    • ARC-AGI: 31.9 observed win share
      arcprize.org · Source 1
    • Aime: 100.0 observed win share
      Mistral · Source 1
    Coding1 families · 1 with independent evidence · Preliminary3.5

    1 core families; 18 direct opponents across 9 labs. Needs broader benchmark and opponent support

    Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

    Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 7/7 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 20/20 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

    Audit: family and publisher holdouts improved on neutral predictions within evaluated coverage. Validation audit.

    Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

    • SWE-bench Verified: 77.8 observed win share
      swebench.com · Source 1
    Human pref1 families · 1 with independent evidence · Supported32.5

    1 core families; 114 direct opponents across 19 labs.

    Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

    Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 1/1 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 1/1 unsupported. Smoothing check: 23.5–40.8; 0/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

    Audit: cross-family and cross-publisher predictions could not be evaluated from the available comparison network. Validation audit.

    Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

    • Human preference (Arena): 82.5 observed win share
      lmarena.ai · Source 1
    Knowledge1 families · 1 with independent evidence · PreliminaryUnknown

    1 core families; 51 direct opponents across 12 labs. No connected comparison to the complete reference panel

    Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

    Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 4/4 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 5/5 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

    Audit: almost no publisher-held-out comparisons remained estimable. Cross-source validity is unresolved. Validation audit.

    Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

    • MMLU-Pro: 83.3 observed win share
      huggingface.co · Source 1
    MultimodalNo comparable evidenceUnknown

    0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

    Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

    Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 8/8 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 8/8 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

    Audit: limited publisher-held-out coverage. Cross-source validity is unresolved. Validation audit.

    Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

      Long contextNo comparable evidenceUnknown

      0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

      Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

      Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 5/5 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 5/5 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

      Audit: family and publisher holdouts underperformed neutral predictions. Treat this as an exploratory estimate. Validation audit.

      Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

        Scores estimate outcomes against a shared reference panel; they are not accuracy percentages. Sparse or disconnected evidence cannot qualify an overall profile. Open a capability to inspect its evidence.

        Compare 3 effort levels across 14 benchmark/harness combinations →

        Reported effort · Not specified

        Settings reported in this model's published benchmark results, including results outside the aggregate. Effort names are provider-specific. These are not API defaults or equal compute budgets.

        Mixed settings means multiple settings occur in the evidence. Best across efforts means the source selected its best reported result across settings; it does not mean Max. Unspecified settings stay unknown. This model-summary chart combines reported settings. The leaderboard keeps identified configurations separate and excludes unknown effort.

        Inspect each result and its source ↓ · Download effort evidence

        Compare capability profiles →

        Score contributions and missing evidence

        5 contributing families across 4 capabilities. Fixed reference panels do not change when the catalog expands.

        Capability is fitted jointly across families. Capability estimates below describe different task areas; their weighted sum is not the Capability score.

        Results without reviewed compatibility or a reference match remain in the raw evidence below. Coverage counts only contributing results.

        Model information & shareable badge
        Lab
        Z.ai
        Catalog status
        active
        Availability
        Documented provider API; downloadable official weights
        Family
        GLM
        Released
        —
        Context
        200,000 tokens
        License
        MIT
        Model card
        https://docs.z.ai/guides/overview/overview
        Default Capability family coverage
        Documented-evidence family coverage/badge/glm-5.svg
        Benchmark scores & sources

        Original results, evaluation harnesses, and evidence behind this model.

        BenchmarkBucketScoreHarnessEvidenceSource-recorded date
        AIME 2025 avg@16 · source release snapshot; version not specifiedHard reasoning87.1%
        Reported settings & source

        Maximum reasoning; Sonnet4.6 external API truncation caveat.

        First-party reported result; comparator results retain the source evaluation setup.

        Mistral Medium 3.5 model card performance charts · images/image1.png · reviewed 2026-09-06

        		Published configuration

        Effort: Not specified

        contributes to capability        		lab self-reportReviewed 2026-09-06
        AllenAI IFBench · source release snapshot; version not specifiedSupporting evidence67%
        Reported settings & source

        Maximum reasoning; Sonnet4.6 external API truncation caveat.

        First-party reported result; comparator results retain the source evaluation setup.

        Mistral Medium 3.5 model card performance charts · images/image1.png · reviewed 2026-09-06

        		Published configuration

        Effort: Not specified

        		lab self-report

        Supporting evidence outside the reviewed capability core

        		Reviewed 2026-09-06
        ARC-AGI-2Hard reasoning4.9%ARC Prize verified

        Effort: Not specified

        contributes to capability        		official board2026-02-20
        Collie · source release snapshot; version not specifiedSupporting evidence86.4%
        Reported settings & source

        Maximum reasoning; Sonnet4.6 external API truncation caveat.

        First-party reported result; comparator results retain the source evaluation setup.

        Mistral Medium 3.5 model card performance charts · images/image1.png · reviewed 2026-09-06

        		Published configuration

        Effort: Not specified

        		lab self-report

        Supporting evidence outside the reviewed capability core

        		Reviewed 2026-09-06
        LMArena Text ArenaHuman pref1458LMArena Text

        Effort: Not specified

        contributes to capability        		official board2026-09-11
        MMLU-ProKnowledge86%MMLU-Pro reported

        Effort: Not specified

        contributes to capability        		official board2026-09-11
        SWE-bench VerifiedCoding72.8%SWE-bench Verified official

        Effort: Not specified

        contributes to capability        		official board2026-02-17
        DeepSWE v1.1Agentic————
        GDPval-AAAgentic————
        GPQA DiamondHard reasoning————
        Humanity's Last ExamHard reasoning————
        LiveCodeBenchCoding————
        OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic————
        SWE-bench ProAgentic————
        Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic————