Model Comparison

GLM-4.6 vs DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

Comparing GLM-4.6 and DeepSeek VL2 Tiny across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

GLM-4.6 and DeepSeek VL2 Tiny don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
Input tokens$0.55
Output tokens$2.00
Best providerFireworks
DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

354.0B diff

GLM-4.6 has 354.0B more parameters than DeepSeek VL2 Tiny, making it 11800.0% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
357.0Bparameters
DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
3.0Bparameters
357.0B
GLM-4.6
3.0B
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only GLM-4.6 specifies input context (131,072 tokens). Only GLM-4.6 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both GLM-4.6 and DeepSeek VL2 Tiny support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

GLM-4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-4.6 is licensed under MIT, while DeepSeek VL2 Tiny uses deepseek.

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

GLM-4.6

MIT

Open weights

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

deepseek

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-4.6 was released on 2025-09-30, while DeepSeek VL2 Tiny was released on 2024-12-13.

GLM-4.6 is 10 months newer than DeepSeek VL2 Tiny.

GLM-4.6

Sep 30, 2025

6 months ago

9mo newer
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

Dec 13, 2024

1.3 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

Zhipu AI
Larger context window (131,072 tokens)
DeepSeek

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-4.6 vs DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

GLM-4.6 (Zhipu AI) and DeepSeek VL2 Tiny (DeepSeek) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.
GLM-4.6 scores AIME 2025: 93.9%, LiveCodeBench v6: 82.8%, GPQA: 81.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 68.0%, BrowseComp: 45.1%. DeepSeek VL2 Tiny scores DocVQA: 88.9%, ChartQA: 81.0%, OCRBench: 80.9%, TextVQA: 80.7%, AI2D: 71.6%.
GLM-4.6 supports 131K tokens and DeepSeek VL2 Tiny 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 licensing (MIT vs deepseek). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
GLM-4.6 is developed by Zhipu AI and DeepSeek VL2 Tiny is developed by DeepSeek.