Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 9B vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 9B Google

25.9

Rank #341 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.2 leads 57.1 to 9.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0.6% for Gemma 2 9B and 86.4% for GLM-5.2.

Side by side

Gemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index25.951.1
Released2024-06-242026-06-13
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked3551

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
LMArena Coding11731485
SWE-bench Verified—78.7%
DeepSWE—43.8%
FrontierCode—24.5%
LMArena WebDev—1603
SciCode—50.5%
WeirdML—70.1%
BigCodeBench Instruct34.7%—
LiveBench Coding22.5%—
BigCodeBench Complete40.6%—
ALE-Bench—1,047

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: —, GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-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 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
LMArena Hard Prompts11711480
Epoch Capabilities Index119.83151.78
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%
LiveBench Reasoning15.2%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—93.6%
LiveBench Data Analysis36.4%—
LMCA—45.8%
Surface Evolver Bench—55.6%
LiveBench28.7%—
PIQA83.7%—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.6%86.4%
LMArena Math11831482
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—59.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4—29.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—67.6%
ProofBench—35%
LiveBench Math19.8%—
MATH Level 521%—
GSM8K84.9%—

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
GPQA Diamond27.5%91.9%
LMArena Expert11471486
SimpleQA Verified—34.2%
BoolQ85.7%—
MMLU72.1%—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English11881459
LMArena Chinese11851519
LMArena French11901479
LMArena German11861468
LMArena Japanese11441451
LMArena Korean11371445
LMArena Russian12001466
LMArena Spanish12001477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following11781465
LiveBench Instruction Following52.6%—

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query11971479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGLM-5.2
LMArena Text12071470
LMArena Creative Writing12061462
EQ-Bench Creative Writing8411757
LMArena Multi-Turn11931469
EQ-Bench 4—1222
LiveBench Language25.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 9B better than GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 9B or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and GLM-5.2 share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 51.

Related comparisons

Go deeper