Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 1.1 2b IT Google

28.8

Rank #313 Confirmed

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

49.6

Rank #45 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3-Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 65.4 to 25.3.

Side by side

Gemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index28.849.6
Released—2026-08-20
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.15
Output $ / M tokens—$0.50
Results tracked1636

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 29.6 (#294), GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.7 (#26)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Coding10341506
DeepSWE—63.4%
FrontierCode—31.8%
LMArena WebDev—1614
SciCode—51.6%
ALE-Bench—303.55
HumanEval+17.7%—
MBPP+23.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.3 (#41)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
APEX-Agents—52.8%
GDP.pdf—14%

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 18.2 (#268), GLM-5.3-Flash: 31.7 (#69)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts10051490
CritPt—15.4%
Chess Puzzles—14%
Mystery Game Puzzles—8%
Surface Evolver Bench—52.5%
Bench to the Future 3—0.15
Epoch Capabilities Index—151.9

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 28.3 (#230), GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#38)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Math10471499
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—55.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4—17.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.9%
ProofBench—21%

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.0 (#255), GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#33)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Expert9701512
GPQA Diamond—90.2%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.6 (#25)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Vision—1304

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.7 (#284), GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.2 (#24)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Non-English9881462
LMArena Chinese10111529
LMArena German9441457
LMArena Korean8991443
LMArena Russian9901472
LMArena French—1495
LMArena Japanese—1420
LMArena Spanish—1471

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 50.1 (#294), GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.8 (#17)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following9921480

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.5 (#281), GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.3 (#41)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Longer Query10031479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.3 (#301), GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.4 (#49)

BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Text10221471
LMArena Creative Writing9981440
LMArena Multi-Turn9581471

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than GLM-5.3-Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or GLM-5.3-Flash better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.7 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and GLM-5.3-Flash share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3-Flash has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper