Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs GLM-4.6V
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 37.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.6V in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.6V leads 27.6 to 22.0.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 37.8 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2025-12-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.90 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6V leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.9 (#185), GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1390 |
| LiveBench Coding | 47.1% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 22.0 (#210), GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1324 | 1368 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 50.1% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.1 | — |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.1 (#196), GLM-4.6V: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 37.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 58.1% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1309 | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.6V leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 35.0 (#189), GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1305 | 1371 |
| MMLU-Pro | 72% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50% | — |
Multimodal GLM-4.6V leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.2 (#109), GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1100 | 1164 |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.0 (#161), GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1323 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1339 | 1425 |
| LMArena Russian | 1328 | 1340 |
| LMArena French | 1347 | — |
| LMArena German | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1301 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1325 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1313 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.4 (#163), GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | 1352 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 78.3% | — |
| IFEval | 82.4% | — |
Long Context GLM-4.6V leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#160), GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1320 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.7 (#177), GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1330 | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1307 | 1360 |
| WildBench | 79% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 37.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or GLM-4.6V better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.9 versus 37.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and GLM-4.6V share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.