Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs GLM-4.7

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7 costs 4.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 36 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Google

56.7

Rank #23 Confirmed

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 36 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 8 categories and GLM-4.7 in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 24.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 55% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and 6% for GLM-4.7.
  • GLM-4.7 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
  • Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index56.742.0
Released2026-02-192025-12-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M205K
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$12$2.20
Results tracked7136

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7 leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99), GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
LMArena WebDev14471435
SciCode58.9%45.1%
LMArena Coding14841454
ALE-Bench1,161399.48
SWE-bench Verified75.6%—
DeepSWE11.7%—
GSO22.6%—
WeirdML72.1%—
MirrorCode8.9%—
AlgoTune2.02—

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
Terminal-Bench80.2%33.4%
Vending-Bench 23,7742,377
APEX-Agents35.3%—
τ²-bench Banking26%—
DeepResearch Bench47.8%—
PostTrainBench22%—
BALROG57%—
ExploitBench26.1%—
GBAEval0.8%—
GDP.pdf17%—
LMArena Search1211—
METR Time Horizons77%—

Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12), GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
SimpleBench79.6%47.7%
CritPt17.7%1.7%
Chess Puzzles55%6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14851443
Epoch Capabilities Index154.77143.51
ARC-AGI-277.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)97.4%—
ARC-AGI-198%—
EnigmaEval36.8%—
Thematic Generalization79.4%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.1%—
LMCA53.8%—
ForecastBench59—

Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%83.3%
ProofBench26%6%
LMArena Math14851423
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)36.9%2.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)16.7%0%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions86.5%—

Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
GPQA Diamond94.4%83.3%
SimpleQA Verified73.5%32.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.4%11.7%
LMArena Expert14851424
Humanity's Last Exam46.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), GLM-4.7: —

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
LMArena Vision1296—
Blueprint-Bench 226.5%—
Furniture Assembly26.7%—
LMArena Document1444—

Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12), GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
LMArena Non-English14771417
LMArena Chinese15291495
LMArena French14871432
LMArena German14911424
LMArena Japanese14931439
LMArena Korean14551399
LMArena Russian14981423
LMArena Spanish14791434

Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
LMArena Instruction Following14661411

Long Context Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
CL-bench20.8%15.9%
CL-bench Life16.9%10.9%
LMArena Longer Query14831432

Writing & Preference Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37), GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-4.7
LMArena Text14811435
LMArena Creative Writing14821401
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14911413
LMArena Multi-Turn14881446
EQ-Bench 41142—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than GLM-4.7?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7 costs 4.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or GLM-4.7 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 42.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and GLM-4.7 share?

36 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper