Model comparison

Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 1.1 2b IT Google

29.3

Rank #313 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.2 leads 70.4 to 25.1.

Side by side

Gemma 1.1 2b IT and GLM-5.2 specifications
Gemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index29.351.1
Released—2026-06-13
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked1651

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299), GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
LMArena Coding10341485
SWE-bench Verified—78.7%
DeepSWE—43.8%
FrontierCode—24.5%
LMArena WebDev—1603
SciCode—50.5%
WeirdML—70.1%
ALE-Bench—1,047
HumanEval+17.7%—
MBPP+23.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-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

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270), GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
LMArena Hard Prompts10051480
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%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—93.6%
LMCA—45.8%
Surface Evolver Bench—55.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—151.78

Math GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232), GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
LMArena Math10471482
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%

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258), GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
LMArena Expert9701486
GPQA Diamond—91.9%
SimpleQA Verified—34.2%

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289), GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English9881459
LMArena Chinese10121519
LMArena German9441468
LMArena Korean8991445
LMArena Russian9901466
LMArena French—1479
LMArena Japanese—1451
LMArena Spanish—1477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299), GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following9921465

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286), GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query10031479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306), GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.2
LMArena Text10221470
LMArena Creative Writing9981462
LMArena Multi-Turn9591469
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1757
EQ-Bench 4—1222

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and GLM-5.2 share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 51.

Related comparisons

Go deeper