# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GLM-4.5V

> Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.5V score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 39.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-glm-4-5v
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in long context, where GLM-4.5V leads 39.6 to 29.1.
- GLM-4.5V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 39.2 |
| Rank | 171 | 158 |
| Context | — | 64K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.60 |
| Output $/M | — | $1.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- GLM-4.5V: 38.9 (#152)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1347 |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- GLM-4.5V: 26.5 (#118)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 59.8% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1335 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- GLM-4.5V: 34.7 (#157)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1353 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- GLM-4.5V: 36.8 (#155)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1353 |

## Multimodal

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- GLM-4.5V: 33.6 (#86)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1154 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- GLM-4.5V: 44.9 (#172)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1338 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1335 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- GLM-4.5V: 69.4 (#170)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1311 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#166)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1305 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- GLM-4.5V: 52.7 (#162)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1333 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1295 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1333 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GLM-4.5V?

Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.5V score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 39.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GLM-4.5V better for coding?

GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.5V share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.5V has 15.