Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GLM-5V-Turbo
GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- The widest gap is in long context, where GLM-5V-Turbo leads 44.0 to 29.1.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 43.1 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 200K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $4 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), GLM-5V-Turbo: 41.8 (#105)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1400 |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1467 |
Reasoning GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), GLM-5V-Turbo: 28.5 (#87)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1443 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), GLM-5V-Turbo: 36.6 (#109)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1440 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1451 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.1 (#41)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1264 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1416 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.2 (#69)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1420 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1488 |
| LMArena French | — | 1443 |
| LMArena German | — | 1422 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1432 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1446 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.1 (#75)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1422 |
Long Context GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#76)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1439 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5V-Turbo leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.6 (#69)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5V-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1414 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1432 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GLM-5V-Turbo?
GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GLM-5V-Turbo better for coding?
GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-5V-Turbo share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5V-Turbo has 19.