Model comparison

Gemma 7B vs GLM-5.2

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 7B Google

30.0

Rank #299 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 7B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.2 leads 70.4 to 27.1.

Side by side

Gemma 7B and GLM-5.2 specifications
Gemma 7BGLM-5.2
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index30.051.1
Released2024-02-212026-06-13
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked2751

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 7B: 30.5 (#294), GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-5.2
LMArena Coding10481485
SWE-bench Verified—78.7%
DeepSWE—43.8%
FrontierCode—24.5%
LMArena WebDev—1603
SciCode—50.5%
WeirdML—70.1%
ALE-Bench—1,047
HumanEval+28.7%—
MBPP+43.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 7B: —, GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-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 7B: 19.9 (#249), GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-5.2
LMArena Hard Prompts10421480
Epoch Capabilities Index111.99151.78
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%
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—93.6%
LMCA—45.8%
Surface Evolver Bench—55.6%
Adversarial NLI48.7%—
BIG-Bench Hard55.1%—
HellaSwag82.2%—
PIQA81.2%—
WinoGrande79%—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 7B: 31.2 (#228), GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-5.2
LMArena Math10661482
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—59.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4—29.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—67.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.4%
ProofBench—35%
GSM8K46.4%—

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 7B: 27.3 (#252), GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-5.2
LMArena Expert10011486
GPQA Diamond—91.9%
SimpleQA Verified—34.2%
ARC (AI2) Challenge78.3%—
BoolQ83.2%—
MMLU66.1%—
OpenBookQA78.6%—
TriviaQA72.3%—

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 7B: 25.1 (#287), GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English9991459
LMArena Chinese10351519
LMArena French10251479
LMArena Russian9931466
LMArena German—1468
LMArena Japanese—1451
LMArena Korean—1445
LMArena Spanish—1477

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 7B: 51.5 (#295), GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following10171465

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 7B: 31.1 (#282), GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query10221479

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Gemma 7B: 27.1 (#302), GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 7BGLM-5.2
LMArena Text10561470
LMArena Creative Writing10241462
LMArena Multi-Turn9631469
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1757
EQ-Bench 4—1222

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 7B better than GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 7B or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 30.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 7B and GLM-5.2 share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 7B has 27 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 51.

Related comparisons

Go deeper