The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.1 vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

GLM-5.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched at 38.9 and 35.0 on the LLM Stats Score. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is 4.2x cheaper per token.

Zhipu AI · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 38.9 and 35.0.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, GLM-5.1 wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is roughly 4.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) also accepts a larger context window (262,144 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose GLM-5.1

  • your work emphasizes coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 4 exact shared results

Choose Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

  • cost matters — it's about 4.2x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GLM-5.1
Zhipu AI
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
38.9
#77
35.0
#108
Reasoning
38.8
#75
36.2
#94
Coding
29.4
#66
21.0
#108
Agents
23.8
#70
16.5
#99
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
3 of 4
1 of 4
Input price
$1.05 / M
$0.20 / M
Output price
$3.50 / M
$1.00 / M
Context window
202,752
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
GLM-5.1
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Math
33.3#58
28.1#101
Tool use
19.2#73
11.0#133
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

18 reported for GLM-5.1 · 19 for Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

4 shared

GLM-5.1 outperforms in 3 benchmarks (BrowseComp, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-Bench Pro), while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

GLM-5.1 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) costs less

For input processing, GLM-5.1 ($1.05/1M tokens) is 5.3x more expensive than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) ($0.20/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5.1 ($3.50/1M tokens) is 3.5x more expensive than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) ($1.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-5.1 is more expensive than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B).*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.1
Input tokens$1.05
Output tokens$3.50
Best providerDeepinfra
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Input tokens$0.20
Output tokens$1.00
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

634.0B diff

GLM-5.1 has 634.0B more parameters than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B), making it 528.3% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.1
754.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
120.0Bparameters
754.0B
GLM-5.1
120.0B
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to GLM-5.1's 202,752 tokens. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while GLM-5.1 is limited to 202,752 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.1
Input202,752 tokens
Output202,752 tokens
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) supports multimodal inputs, whereas GLM-5.1 does not.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GLM-5.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5.1 is licensed under MIT, while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) uses OpenMDW License v1.1.

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

GLM-5.1

MIT

Open weights

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

OpenMDW License v1.1

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5.1 was released on 2026-04-07, while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) was released on 2026-10-15.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is 6 months newer than GLM-5.1.

GLM-5.1

Apr 7, 2026

6 months ago

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Oct 15, 2026

4 days ago

6mo newer

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

Provider Availability

GLM-5.1 is available from DeepInfra, FriendliAI, ZAI. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is available from DeepInfra.

GLM-5.1

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $1.05/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.50/1M
friendli logo
FriendliAI
Input Price:Input: $1.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $1.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GLM-5.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5.1
✓ Preferred
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5.1 vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B).

Which is better, GLM-5.1 or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

GLM-5.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 38.9 and 35.0. GLM-5.1 is made by Zhipu AI and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is made by NVIDIA. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does GLM-5.1 compare to Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) in benchmarks?

GLM-5.1 scores Vending-Bench 2: 100.0%, AIME 2026: 95.3%, HMMT 2025: 94.0%, GPQA: 86.2%, IMO-AnswerBench: 83.8%. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) scores GPQA: 89.5%, LiveCodeBench v6: 88.2%, CharXiv-R: 80.8%, MathVision: 78.2%, BrowseComp: 78.0%.

Is GLM-5.1 cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is 5.3x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5.1 costs $1.05/M input and $3.50/M output via deepinfra. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) costs $0.20/M input and $1.00/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

GLM-5.1 supports 203K tokens and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GLM-5.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (38.9 vs 35.0), context window (203K vs 262K), input pricing ($1.05 vs $0.20/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

GLM-5.1 is developed by Zhipu AI and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons