#35 GLM 5V Turbo
medium
Invalid SVG
- Cost
- $0.000
- Time
- 300.0s
- Tokens
- 0 tok
Z.ai
Release: 2026-04-01
Tested on: 2026-04-11 01:19
z-ai/glm-5v-turbo::medium
~106B total (~12B active)MoEClosedEstimated
(medium)
(none)
Summary
GLM 5V Turbo scores 7.8 on AI BENCHY and ranks #35. It has N/A reliability, a 77.8% pass rate, $0.291 total cost, and 14.96s average response time.
What makes GLM 5V Turbo unique: Its total benchmark cost is unusually low for its score range.
Archived model: this model is no longer updated or tested on new tests.
Model facts
Researched on 2026-08-12
- Parameters
- ~106B total (~12B active)
- Architecture
- MoE
- Availability
- Closed
- License
- -
Best estimate from public evidence; the vendor did not disclose every value. Vendor does not disclose the count.
7.8
Consistency
7.5
N/A
$0.291
Total Output Tokens
61,292
Total Input Tokens
0
Input Price
$1.200 / 1M
Output Price
$4.000 / 1M
Flaky tests
6
Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
Run history
| Tested on | Score | Reliability | Tests Correct | Total Cost | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-04 13:09 Re-test | 6.7 | 10.0 | $0.457 | Compare | |
| 2026-06-04 13:09 Re-test | 6.7 | 10.0 | $0.457 | Compare | |
| 2026-06-04 13:09 New test added | 7.2 | 10.0 | $0.457 | Compare | |
| 2026-05-21 23:44 Suite changed | 7.4 | 10.0 | $0.412 | Compare | |
| 2026-04-11 01:19 First recorded run | 7.8 | N/A | $0.291 | Current run |
Run comparison
| Run | Benchmark coverage | Score | Consistency | Reliability | Tests Correct | Flaky tests | Total Output Tokens | Total Input Tokens | Total Cost | Response Time (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-11 01:19 · First recorded run | 54/54 attempts | 7.8 | 7.5 | N/A | 11/18 | 6 | 61,292 | 0 | $0.291 | 14.96s |
| 2026-06-04 13:09 · New test added | 63/63 attempts | 7.2 | 7.9 | 10.0 | 11/21 | 6 | 100,762 | 44,615 | $0.457 | 23.08s |
| Difference | — | +0.6 | -0.4 | 0 | 0 | -39470 | -44615 | -$0.166 | -8115ms |
Benchmark coverage differs: 54/54 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test) versus 63/63 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test). Totals and repeat-sensitive metrics are not directly comparable.
These two runs used different benchmark suites, so the deltas reflect both model changes and suite changes.
Charts
Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-AI Tricks | 7.2 | 6.1 | |
| Coding | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Combined | 6.9 | 3.8 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Domain specific | 5.3 | 7.2 | |
| General Intelligence | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Instructions following | 9.9 | 10.0 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 7.7 | 7.3 | |
| Tool Calling | 7.0 | 3.7 |