Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GLM-4.7-Flash

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

GLM-4.7-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.8

Rank #180 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 7 categories and GLM-4.7-Flash in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 56.0 to 35.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 84.7% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 58.3% for GLM-4.7-Flash.
  • GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 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 200K.
  • GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index45.038.8
Released2025-03-252026-01-19
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M200K
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.06
Output $ / M tokens$10$0.40
Results tracked7821

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-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Coding14521383
SWE-bench Verified57.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)53.6%—
Aider Polyglot83.1%—
LMArena WebDev1227—
SciCode42.8%—
GSO3.9%—
WeirdML54%—
LiveBench Coding85.9%—
CadEval64%—
ALE-Bench785.52—
AlgoTune1.51—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), GLM-4.7-Flash: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
Terminal-Bench32.6%—
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-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
Chess Puzzles20%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14551356
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench62.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%—
ARC-AGI-141%—
CritPt2%—
EnigmaEval5.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning89.8%—
DTBench82.4%—
LiveBench Data Analysis79.9%—
LMCA34.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index145.32—
ForecastBench61.3—
LiveBench82.3%—

Math GLM-4.7-Flash leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584.7%58.3%
LMArena Math14501355
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)24.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 40%—
Omni-MATH41.6%—
LiveBench Math90.2%—
MATH Level 595.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)14.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46), GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
GPQA Diamond85.3%60.5%
Vectara Hallucination Rate7%9.3%
LMArena Expert14521357
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-4.7-Flash: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Vision1263—
GeoBench86%—
VPCT48%—
LMArena Document1421—
SpatialViz-Bench44.7%—

Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Non-English14511330
LMArena Chinese15071403
LMArena French14721332
LMArena German14871337
LMArena Korean14341283
LMArena Russian14611332
LMArena Spanish14731350
LMArena Japanese1461—

Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following14371327
LiveBench Instruction Following80.6%—
IFEval84%—

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Longer Query14491345
Fiction.LiveBench91.7%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Text14581351
LMArena Creative Writing14541297
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14211125
LMArena Multi-Turn14531342
Short-Story Creative Writing83.8%—
WildBench85.7%—
LiveBench Language67.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than GLM-4.7-Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 24× 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-4.7-Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM-4.7-Flash better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 40.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM-4.7-Flash share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7-Flash has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper