Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs GLM-4.5
GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 1 category and GLM-4.5 in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.5 leads 28.6 to 15.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SWE-bench Verified (bash only): 13.5% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 54.2% for GLM-4.5.
- GLM-4.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 42.0 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2025-07-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 98K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | 54.2% |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | 40.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1434 |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 344.82 |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.52 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), GLM-4.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | 57.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1429 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1427 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | 8.3% |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | 11.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1433 |
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), GLM-4.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1417 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1465 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1418 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1407 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | 1415 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 1380 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1414 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1454 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1404 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | 58.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1412 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1430 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1395 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | 73.4% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | 1343 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1415 |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than GLM-4.5?
GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or GLM-4.5 better for coding?
GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and GLM-4.5 share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5 has 27.