# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GLM-4.6

> GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-glm-4-6
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in long context, where GLM-4.6 leads 43.4 to 29.1.
- GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 40.9 |
| Rank | 171 | 132 |
| Context | — | 205K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.60 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- GLM-4.6: 39.9 (#137)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 55.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1339 |
| SciCode | — | 38.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1449 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 340.82 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- GLM-4.6: 32.1 (#60)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 24.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 72.4% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- GLM-4.6: 23.1 (#168)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 47.4% |
| CritPt | — | 1.1% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1440 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- GLM-4.6: 36.4 (#115)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1431 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 3.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- GLM-4.6: 39.6 (#118)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.5% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1432 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- GLM-4.6: 53.6 (#62)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1500 |
| LMArena French | — | 1459 |
| LMArena German | — | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1394 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1401 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1418 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1436 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- GLM-4.6: 74.5 (#93)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1410 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#91)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1423 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- GLM-4.6: 61.3 (#86)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1440 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1411 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1427 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GLM-4.6?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GLM-4.6 better for coding?

GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.6 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.