Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Pro Google

39.1

Rank #173 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.2 leads 57.1 to 36.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 91.9% for GLM-5.2.
  • GLM-5.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index39.151.1
Released2025-02-052026-06-13
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked1451

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
SWE-bench Verified—78.7%
DeepSWE—43.8%
FrontierCode—24.5%
Aider Polyglot35.6%—
LMArena WebDev—1603
SciCode—50.5%
WeirdML—70.1%
LiveBench Coding63.5%—
LMArena Coding—1485
ALE-Bench—1,047

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
APEX-Agents—45.2%
τ²-bench Banking—37.1%
PostTrainBench—31.7%
GBAEval—0%
Vending-Bench 2—8,314

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
Epoch Capabilities Index135.06151.78
ARC-AGI-2—22.8%
SimpleBench—58.8%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—62.6%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.3%
ARC-AGI-1—77%
CritPt—20.9%
Chess Puzzles—21%
EnigmaEval0.7%—
EBR-Bench—9.5%
LiveBench Reasoning60.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1480
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—93.6%
LiveBench Data Analysis68%—
LMCA—45.8%
Surface Evolver Bench—55.6%
LiveBench65.1%—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—59.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4—29.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—67.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.4%
ProofBench—35%
LiveBench Math71%—
LMArena Math—1482
MATH Level 583.5%—

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
GPQA Diamond65.7%91.9%
SimpleQA Verified—34.2%
Confabulations18.4%—
LMArena Expert—1486

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English—1459
LMArena Chinese—1519
LMArena French—1479
LMArena German—1468
LMArena Japanese—1451
LMArena Korean—1445
LMArena Russian—1466
LMArena Spanish—1477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
LiveBench Instruction Following83.4%—
LMArena Instruction Following—1465

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
Fiction.LiveBench41.7%—
LMArena Longer Query—1479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProGLM-5.2
LMArena Text—1470
LMArena Creative Writing—1462
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1757
EQ-Bench 4—1222
LMArena Multi-Turn—1469
LiveBench Language44.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-5.2 share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 51.

Related comparisons

Go deeper