Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs GLM-4.6
GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 34.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 1 category and GLM-4.6 in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.6 leads 39.9 to 28.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SWE-bench Verified (bash only): 13.5% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 55.4% for GLM-4.6.
- GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 34.8 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2025-09-30 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.2 (#308), GLM-4.6: 39.9 (#137)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | 55.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1351 | 1449 |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1339 |
| SciCode | — | 38.4% |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 340.82 |
Agentic & Tool Use GLM-4.6 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.0 (#85), GLM-4.6: 32.1 (#60)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 24.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 72.4% |
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.6 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#308), GLM-4.6: 23.1 (#168)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | 47.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1440 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| CritPt | — | 1.1% |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.1 (#127), GLM-4.6: 36.4 (#115)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1351 | 1431 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | 3.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge GLM-4.6 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#207), GLM-4.6: 39.6 (#118)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1340 | 1432 |
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.5% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 35.9 (#74), GLM-4.6: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.6 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.6 (#144), GLM-4.6: 53.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1500 |
| LMArena French | 1390 | 1459 |
| LMArena German | 1354 | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1293 | 1394 |
| LMArena Korean | 1314 | 1401 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1418 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1436 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.6 (#91), GLM-4.6: 74.5 (#93)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1410 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context GLM-4.6 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#198), GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#91)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1423 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.8 (#184), GLM-4.6: 61.3 (#86)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1440 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1411 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1427 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than GLM-4.6?
GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 34.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or GLM-4.6 better for coding?
GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 28.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and GLM-4.6 share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.