Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GLM-5.1

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Pro Google

39.1

Rank #173 Confirmed

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.8

Rank #59 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.1 in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 54.9 to 36.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 89.9% for GLM-5.1.
  • GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index39.147.8
Released2025-02-052026-04-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—200K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked1441

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.1 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
SWE-bench Verified—74.2%
Aider Polyglot35.6%—
LMArena WebDev—1508
SciCode—43.8%
WeirdML—57.1%
LiveBench Coding63.5%—
LMArena Coding—1485
ALE-Bench—887.1

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
APEX-Agents—40.9%
ExploitBench—18.1%
GBAEval—0%
Vending-Bench 2—5,634

Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
Epoch Capabilities Index135.06149.84
SimpleBench—55.1%
NYT Connections (extended)—77.7%
CritPt—4.6%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EnigmaEval0.7%—
Thematic Generalization—69.8%
LiveBench Reasoning60.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1472
LiveBench Data Analysis68%—
LiveBench65.1%—

Math GLM-5.1 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—36.8%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—67.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%
ProofBench—22.2%
LiveBench Math71%—
LMArena Math—1473
MATH Level 583.5%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—33.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—12.5%

Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
GPQA Diamond65.7%89.9%
SimpleQA Verified—34%
Confabulations18.4%—
LMArena Expert—1476

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
LMArena Non-English—1447
LMArena Chinese—1515
LMArena French—1474
LMArena German—1465
LMArena Japanese—1434
LMArena Korean—1418
LMArena Russian—1454
LMArena Spanish—1469

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
LiveBench Instruction Following83.4%—
LMArena Instruction Following—1451

Long Context GLM-5.1 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
Fiction.LiveBench41.7%—
LMArena Longer Query—1466

Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.1
LMArena Text—1461
LMArena Creative Writing—1453
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1592
LMArena Multi-Turn—1472
LiveBench Language44.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GLM-5.1?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GLM-5.1 better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-5.1 share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.

Related comparisons

Go deeper