# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GLM-5

> GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-glm-5
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 1 category and GLM-5 in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5 leads 52.3 to 36.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 87.8% for GLM-5.
- GLM-5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 46.1 |
| Rank | 173 | 66 |
| Context | — | 205K |
| Input $/M | — | $1 |
| Output $/M | — | $3.20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187)
- GLM-5: 49.0 (#52)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 72.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 72.8% |
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1434 |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 69.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 48.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1461 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 765.62 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- GLM-5: 31.1 (#71)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 52.4% |
| τ²-bench Airline | — | 82.5% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 9.8% |
| τ²-bench Retail | — | 73.7% |
| τ²-bench Telecom | — | 86.8% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,432 |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198)
- GLM-5: 27.6 (#116)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 145.83 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| SimpleBench | — | 53.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 75% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 44.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 10% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1452 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 61 |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100)
- GLM-5: 46.4 (#71)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 65.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 80% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1440 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 16.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167)
- GLM-5: 52.3 (#64)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 87.8% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1454 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- GLM-5: 53.7 (#58)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1511 |
| LMArena French | — | 1455 |
| LMArena German | — | 1445 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1416 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1423 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1436 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1454 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59)
- GLM-5: 75.2 (#67)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1428 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292)
- GLM-5: 44.7 (#60)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 18.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1446 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165)
- GLM-5: 66.0 (#38)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1446 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1439 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1601 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1456 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GLM-5?

GLM-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.1 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GLM-5 better for coding?

GLM-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.0 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-5 share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5 has 45.