Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GLM-4.6

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6 costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

GLM-4.6 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.4

Rank #135 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 7 categories and GLM-4.6 in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 59.8 to 43.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 70.3% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 47.4% for GLM-4.6.
  • GLM-4.6 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index45.041.4
Released2025-03-252025-09-30
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M205K
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$10$2.20
Results tracked7829

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101), GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)53.6%55.4%
LMArena WebDev12271340
SciCode42.8%38.4%
LMArena Coding14521449
ALE-Bench785.52340.82
SWE-bench Verified57.6%—
Aider Polyglot83.1%—
GSO3.9%—
WeirdML54%—
LiveBench Coding85.9%—
CadEval64%—
AlgoTune1.51—

Agentic & Tool Use GLM-4.6 leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
Terminal-Bench32.6%24.5%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—72.4%
GDPval23.3%—
Remote Labor Index0.8%—
TheAgentCompany30.3%—
τ²-bench Banking13.7%—
DeepResearch Bench42.8%—
BALROG43.3%—
LMArena Search1142—
METR Time Horizons55.4%—
Vending-Bench 2573.64—

Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99), GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%47.4%
CritPt2%1.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts14551440
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench62.4%—
ARC-AGI-141%—
Chess Puzzles20%—
EnigmaEval5.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning89.8%—
DTBench82.4%—
LiveBench Data Analysis79.9%—
LMCA34.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index145.32—
ForecastBench61.3—
LiveBench82.3%—

Math GLM-4.6 leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
LMArena Math14501432
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)14.1%3.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%2.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)24.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 40%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584.7%—
Omni-MATH41.6%—
LiveBench Math90.2%—
MATH Level 595.9%—

Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46), GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
Vectara Hallucination Rate7%9.5%
LMArena Expert14521431
GPQA Diamond85.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam21.6%—
MMLU-Pro86.3%—
Confabulations10.6%—
GPQA (HELM)74.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18), GLM-4.6: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
LMArena Vision1263—
GeoBench86%—
VPCT48%—
LMArena Document1421—
SpatialViz-Bench44.7%—

Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
LMArena Non-English14511426
LMArena Chinese15071499
LMArena French14721459
LMArena German14871447
LMArena Japanese14611393
LMArena Korean14341400
LMArena Russian14611419
LMArena Spanish14731436

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
LMArena Instruction Following14371410
LiveBench Instruction Following80.6%—
IFEval84%—

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
LMArena Longer Query14491422
Fiction.LiveBench91.7%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.6
LMArena Text14581440
LMArena Creative Writing14541411
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14211411
LMArena Multi-Turn14531427
Short-Story Creative Writing83.8%—
WildBench85.7%—
LiveBench Language67.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than GLM-4.6?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6 costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM-4.6?

GLM-4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM-4.6 better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM-4.6 share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper