Model comparison
Gemma 3 12B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 12B costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 12B scores higher in 1 category and GLM-4.7-Flash in 7 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 36.1 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 16.7% for Gemma 3 12B and 58.3% for GLM-4.7-Flash.
- Gemma 3 12B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.06 / $0.40 for GLM-4.7-Flash.
- GLM-4.7-Flash accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 32.1 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2025-03-12 | 2026-01-19 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 200K |
| Max output | 8K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | $0.06 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 24 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Gemma 3 12B: 31.7 (#280), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1281 | 1383 |
| SciCode | 17.4% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3 12B: 25.5 (#108), GLM-4.7-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 30.4% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Gemma 3 12B: 15.7 (#313), GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1309 | 1356 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 48.8% | — |
| LMCA | 4.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 123.5 | — |
Math GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Gemma 3 12B: 22.3 (#279), GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 16.7% | 58.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1307 | 1355 |
Knowledge GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Gemma 3 12B: 26.5 (#257), GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 39.5% | 60.5% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 4.4% | 9.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1248 | 1357 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3 12B: —, GLM-4.7-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MindCube | 46.7% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemma 3 12B: 45.7 (#165), GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1318 | 1330 |
| LMArena German | 1370 | 1337 |
| LMArena Russian | 1335 | 1332 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1403 |
| LMArena French | — | 1332 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1283 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1350 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Gemma 3 12B: 68.6 (#186), GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1299 | 1327 |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemma 3 12B: 40.0 (#162), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1317 | 1345 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemma 3 12B: 47.5 (#209), GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 12B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1334 | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1331 | 1297 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1126 | 1125 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1334 | 1342 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 12B better than GLM-4.7-Flash?
GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 12B costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 12B or GLM-4.7-Flash?
Gemma 3 12B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7-Flash lists at $0.06 and $0.40.
Is Gemma 3 12B or GLM-4.7-Flash better for coding?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-4.7-Flash does, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 12B and GLM-4.7-Flash share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 12B has 24 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7-Flash has 21.