Model Comparison

GLM-4.5 vs Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

GLM-4.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

GLM-4.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen2.5-Omni-7B is better at 0 benchmarks.

GLM-4.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.5
Input tokens$0.40
Output tokens$1.60
Best providerDeepinfra
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

348.0B diff

GLM-4.5 has 348.0B more parameters than Qwen2.5-Omni-7B, making it 4971.4% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-4.5
355.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B
7.0Bparameters
355.0B
GLM-4.5
7.0B
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only GLM-4.5 specifies input context (131,072 tokens). Only GLM-4.5 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Zhipu AI
GLM-4.5
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Qwen2.5-Omni-7B supports multimodal inputs, whereas GLM-4.5 does not.

Qwen2.5-Omni-7B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GLM-4.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-4.5 is licensed under MIT, while Qwen2.5-Omni-7B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

GLM-4.5

MIT

Open weights

Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-4.5 was released on 2025-07-28, while Qwen2.5-Omni-7B was released on 2025-03-27.

GLM-4.5 is 4 months newer than Qwen2.5-Omni-7B.

GLM-4.5

Jul 28, 2025

8 months ago

4mo newer
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Mar 27, 2025

1.1 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Key Takeaways

Larger context window (131,072 tokens)
Higher GPQA score (79.1% vs 30.8%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (84.6% vs 47.0%)
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Supports multimodal inputs

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.5
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-4.5 vs Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

GLM-4.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-4.5 is made by Zhipu AI and Qwen2.5-Omni-7B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
GLM-4.5 scores MATH-500: 98.2%, AIME 2024: 91.0%, MMLU-Pro: 84.6%, TAU-bench Retail: 79.7%, GPQA: 79.1%. Qwen2.5-Omni-7B scores DocVQA: 95.2%, VocalSound: 93.9%, GSM8k: 88.7%, GiantSteps Tempo: 88.0%, ChartQA: 85.3%.
GLM-4.5 supports 131K tokens and Qwen2.5-Omni-7B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
GLM-4.5 is developed by Zhipu AI and Qwen2.5-Omni-7B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.