Compare / grok-4-1-fast-non-reasoning vs GLM 4.6

grok-4-1-fast-non-reasoning vs GLM 4.6

13 results from 3 sources that measured both models. Each row is in the source's own units; there is no overall winner.

grok-4-1-fast-non-reasoning
xAI · profile
GLM 4.6
Z.ai · profile
Results compared
13
Shared sources
3
BenchmarkMetricgrok-4-1-fast-non-reasoningGLM 4.6
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reportedIrrelevance detection% correct 74.1%85.0%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reportedMemory% correct 26.2%55.7%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reportedMulti-turn tasks% correct 46.8%68.0%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reportedOverall accuracy% correct 58.3%72.4%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reportedRelevance detection% correct 81.2%75.0%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reportedSingle-turn calls (curated)% correct 88.1%87.6%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reportedSingle-turn calls (user-contributed)% correct 77.9%80.9%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reportedWeb search% correct 75.0%77.5%
UGI LeaderboardreportedRequested-length error% off the requested word count 10.0%13.0%
UGI LeaderboardreportedStyle adherencescore from 0 to 1 0.320.38
UGI LeaderboardreportedWriting scorescore out of 100 41.953.3
Vectara Hallucination LeaderboardreportedAnswer rate% of documents 98.5%94.5%
Vectara Hallucination LeaderboardreportedHallucination rate% of summaries 17.8%9.5%

Bold green marks the better value on that metric. Where a source reports ranges that overlap, the difference may not be meaningful; see the benchmark page for ranges.