Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs GLM-4.7
GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.7 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.7 leads 60.9 to 24.0.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 42.0 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | 2025-12-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.7 leads
Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305), GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1454 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1435 |
| SciCode | — | 45.1% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 399.48 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 33.4% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 2,377 |
Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads
Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275), GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1443 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | 143.51 |
| SimpleBench | — | 47.7% |
| CritPt | — | 1.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math GLM-4.7 leads
Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239), GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1423 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 83.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 6% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 2.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 32.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1424 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads
Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294), GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1417 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1495 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1423 |
| LMArena French | — | 1432 |
| LMArena German | — | 1424 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1439 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1434 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads
Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302), GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1411 |
Long Context GLM-4.7 leads
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1432 |
| CL-bench | — | 15.9% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 10.9% |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads
Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308), GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1435 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1401 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1446 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1413 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than GLM-4.7?
GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2B or GLM-4.7 better for coding?
GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and GLM-4.7 share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.