+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
GLM-4.5-Air vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
GLM-4.5-Air leads with 42.2% higher average benchmark score. Overall, GLM-4.5-Air is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.5 Air was created as a lightweight variant of GLM-4.5, designed to provide strong bilingual capabilities with improved efficiency. Built to serve applications requiring practical deployment with reduced resource requirements, it extends GLM-4.5's multilingual strengths to resource-conscious scenarios.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B was created as an ultra-compact open-source model, designed to enable on-device and edge deployment scenarios. Built with just 3 billion parameters while retaining instruction-following abilities, it brings Meta's language technology to mobile devices, IoT applications, and resource-constrained environments.
10 months newer
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
GLM-4.5-Air
Zhipu AI
2025-07-28
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
GLM-4.5-Air
Average Score:75.0%(+42.2%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Average Score:32.8%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
GLM-4.5-Air
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
1 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 171.5 tok/s
+
+
+
+
GLM-4.5-Air
Avg Score:75.0%(+42.2%)
Providers:0
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Avg Score:32.8%
Providers:1