GLM-4.6V-Flash (9B) is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 9 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the one area where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 9 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
Images and chartsGLM-4.6V-Flash (9B)
Other results5 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- All-Angles-BenchGLM-4.6V-Flash (9B) by 6.553.246.7+6.5
- MATH-VisionQwen3 VL 4B (Reasoning) by 5.95460+5.9
- AI2DGLM-4.6V-Flash (9B) by 488.984.9+4
- OCRBench v2 (Chinese)GLM-4.6V-Flash (9B) by 3.759.555.8+3.7
- ScreenSpot-Pro (No tools)Qwen3 VL 4B (Reasoning) by 3.545.749.2+3.5
Questions people ask
Which is better, GLM-4.6V-Flash (9B) or Qwen3 VL 4B (Reasoning)?
GLM-4.6V-Flash (9B) wins the one area where both have results: images and charts. Qwen3 VL 4B (Reasoning) wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 9 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 4 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 5 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.