Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs GLM-4.7
GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 1 category and GLM-4.7 in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.7 leads 44.0 to 28.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 83.3% for GLM-4.7.
- GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 42.0 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2025-12-22 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.7 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1454 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1435 |
| SciCode | — | 45.1% |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 399.48 |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 33.4% |
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 2,377 |
Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | 47.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1443 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | 143.51 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| CritPt | — | 1.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 6% |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 83.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1423 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | 2.4% |
| ProofBench | — | 6% |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | 83.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1424 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 32.2% |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), GLM-4.7: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1417 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1495 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1432 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1424 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | 1439 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 1399 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1423 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1434 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1411 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context GLM-4.7 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1432 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 15.9% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 10.9% |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1435 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1401 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | 1413 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1446 |
| 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-4.7?
GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or GLM-4.7 better for coding?
GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and GLM-4.7 share?
23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.