Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GLM-4.5
GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 3 categories and GLM-4.5 in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where GLM-4.5 leads 38.2 to 29.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 41.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 58.3% for GLM-4.5.
- GLM-4.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 42.0 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2025-07-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 98K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 54.2% |
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 40.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1434 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 344.82 |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.52 |
Reasoning GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 57.9% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1429 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1427 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | 18.4% | 11.3% |
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1433 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1417 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1465 |
| LMArena French | — | 1418 |
| LMArena German | — | 1407 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1415 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1380 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1414 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1454 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1404 |
Long Context GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | 58.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1412 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.5 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1430 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1395 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 73.4% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1343 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1415 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GLM-4.5?
GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GLM-4.5 better for coding?
GLM-4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.5 share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5 has 27.