GLM 5V Turbo vs Mistral Large 4
Compare GLM 5V Turbo and Mistral Large 4 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.
Compare GLM 5V Turbo vs Mistral Large 4 live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
GLM 5V Turbo vs Mistral Large 4 on Vision Evals
Mistral Large 4 scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Reasoning, where Mistral Large 4 leads 38.9% to 31.8%.
Overall, GLM 5V Turbo averages 65.3% (#45 of 61) against 68.5% (#36 of 61) for Mistral Large 4.
Mistral Large 4 is cheaper ($0.0018 vs $0.0031 per sample), while GLM 5V Turbo is faster (6.3s vs 8.8s per sample).
GLM 5V Turbo vs Mistral Large 4 Comparison Table
Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 8, 2026
| Property | GLM 5V Turbo | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Z.ai | Mistral |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Apr 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Context Window | 200K | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | 1.05T total, 49B active |
| License | Proprietary | Custom |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.20 | $0.680 |
| Output $/1M | $4.00 | $2.09 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Phrase Grounding | Not listed | Supported |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 65.3% | 68.5% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0031 | $0.0018 |
| Avg speed / sample | 6.35s | 8.78s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 56.5% | 59.3% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.5 to 60.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 50.2% ±2.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.0 to 53.0 |
| Counting (low) | 48.6% | 54.5% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 55.4 |
| Counting (high) | – | 63.1% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.8 to 64.9 |
| Identification (low) | 84.4% | 85.4% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5 |
| Identification (high) | – | 85.4% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5 |
| OCR (low) | 89.3% | 92.7% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.8 to 93.3 |
| OCR (high) | – | 87.1% ±4.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.6 to 90.4 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 81.4% | 80.1% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 81.4 |
| Data Extraction (high) | – | 82.5% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 83.5 |
| Reasoning (low) | 31.8% | 38.9% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 38.4 to 39.1 |
| Reasoning (high) | 49.7% | 57.6% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 59.6 |
GLM 5V Turbo vs Mistral Large 4: Overview
GLM-5V-Turbo is a native multimodal model from Z.ai that extends the GLM family with joint image, video, and text input aimed at vision-centered coding and agent workflows. The model reads screenshots, design drafts, document layouts, and interface captures and generates runnable code from them, covering tasks such as turning a visual design into a working front end, diagnosing rendering and layout defects from screen captures, and operating graphical user interfaces during long-horizon agent runs. It accepts roughly 200,000 input tokens and can emit up to 131,072 output tokens in a single response, which supports sessions that hold specifications, source files, logs, and visual references at the same time.
Training includes a joint reinforcement learning stage spanning more than 30 tasks simultaneously, an approach Z.ai describes as a way to counter the trade-off in which improving visual recognition degrades programming ability and the reverse. Reported evaluations cover pure-text coding on the backend, frontend, and repository exploration tracks of CC-Bench-V2, together with agent execution suites such as PinchBench, ClawEval, and ZClawBench, indicating that text coding behavior is retained after visual input is added.
Mistral Large 4, nicknamed Le Chonk, is a natively multimodal mixture-of-experts model from Mistral that accepts interleaved text and image input and produces text output. It uses a granular MoE design with roughly 1.05 trillion total parameters and 49 billion active per token, reported as 52 billion when embeddings and output layers are counted, paired with a 1.6 billion parameter vision encoder and a context window of one million tokens. The model is trained from scratch on about 3,800 NVIDIA Grace Blackwell GPUs in Mistral's European data centers and supports more than 160 languages. It behaves as a hybrid instruct and reasoning system, with a reasoning effort setting that selects between direct answers and longer deliberation, alongside function calling and structured output for agentic workflows.
Image understanding is a focus of this generation, covering documents, charts, technical drawings and natural scenes, and the model emits bounding box coordinates for visual grounding queries. Reported grounding results include 42 percent on Dense200 and 73 percent on the DIOR-RSVG remote sensing benchmark. Mistral describes agentic vision workflows in which the model zooms into gigapixel satellite imagery or engineering drawings to verify details, and reports coding results such as 62 percent on DeepSWE. Figures published at preview time are preliminary because the reinforcement learning phase is still in progress.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Mistral Large 4 performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 68.5% (#36 of 61) against 65.3% (#45 of 61) for GLM 5V Turbo. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Mistral Large 4 leads with 38.9% against 31.8%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Mistral Large 4 is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0018 per sample against $0.0031. GLM 5V Turbo is priced at $1.20 per 1M input tokens and $4.00 per 1M output; Mistral Large 4 is priced at $0.68 per 1M input tokens and $2.09 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
GLM 5V Turbo is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 6.3s per inference against 8.8s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.