Model comparison
Gemma 3 4B vs GLM-5.1
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 43× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1'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 4B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.1 in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 54.9 to 11.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 7.5% for Gemma 3 4B and 93.3% for GLM-5.1.
- Gemma 3 4B is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.08 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
- GLM-5.1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 28.1 | 47.8 |
| Released | 2025-03-12 | 2026-04-07 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 200K |
| Max output | 4K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | $1.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 41 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 35.9 (#215), GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1230 | 1485 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 74.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1508 |
| SciCode | — | 43.8% |
| WeirdML | — | 57.1% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 887.1 |
Agentic & Tool Use GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 20.9 (#142), GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 40.9% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 19.6% | — |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,634 |
Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 13.2 (#335), GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 19% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1253 | 1472 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 116.02 | 149.84 |
| SimpleBench | — | 55.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 25.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 77.7% |
| CritPt | — | 4.6% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 69.8% |
| DTBench | 50.9% | — |
| LMCA | 2.8% | — |
Math GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 16.8 (#292), GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.5% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1239 | 1473 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 67.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 22.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 33.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 12.5% |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 11.8 (#299), GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.2% | 89.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | 1476 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.4% | — |
Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 42.5 (#194), GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1273 | 1447 |
| LMArena German | 1281 | 1465 |
| LMArena Russian | 1294 | 1454 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1515 |
| LMArena French | — | 1474 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1434 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1418 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1469 |
Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 65.2 (#225), GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | 1451 |
Long Context GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 38.7 (#194), GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1273 | 1466 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3 4B: 42.0 (#239), GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1291 | 1461 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1271 | 1453 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1068 | 1592 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1255 | 1472 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3 4B better than GLM-5.1?
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 28.1 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 4B costs 43× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 4B or GLM-5.1?
Gemma 3 4B is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.
Is Gemma 3 4B or GLM-5.1 better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-5.1 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 4B and GLM-5.1 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 4B has 22 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.