Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs GLM-4.5V
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.5V in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.5V leads 52.5 to 24.0.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | 2025-08-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 64K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.80 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305), GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1347 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275), GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1334 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 59.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239), GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1354 |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1353 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1154 |
Multilingual GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294), GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1303 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1337 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1298 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1336 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302), GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1311 |
Long Context GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291), GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1304 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.5V leads
Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308), GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1333 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1295 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1332 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than GLM-4.5V?
GLM-4.5V is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2B or GLM-4.5V better for coding?
GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and GLM-4.5V share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5V has 15.