# Gemma 2 9B vs GLM-5.2

> GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-9b-vs-glm-5-2
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 21

## Summary

- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.2 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.2 leads 57.1 to 9.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0.6% for Gemma 2 9B and 86.4% for GLM-5.2.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | 51.1 |
| Rank | 341 | 44 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Input $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | — | $4.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304)
- GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1173 | 1485 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 78.7% |
| DeepSWE | — | 43.8% |
| FrontierCode | — | 24.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1603 |
| SciCode | — | 50.5% |
| WeirdML | — | 70.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,047 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2 9B: —
- GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 45.2% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 37.1% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 31.7% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 8,314 |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309)
- GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1171 | 1480 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.83 | 151.78 |
| 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% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 19% |
| DTBench | — | 93.6% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| LMCA | — | 45.8% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 55.6% |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318)
- GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | 86.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | 1482 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 59.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 29.3% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 67.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 35% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305)
- GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | 91.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | 1486 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34.2% |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| MMLU | 72.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238)
- GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | 1459 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | 1519 |
| LMArena French | 1190 | 1479 |
| LMArena German | 1186 | 1468 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | 1451 |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | 1445 |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | 1466 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | 1477 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269)
- GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | 1465 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233)
- GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | 1479 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281)
- GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | 1470 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | 1462 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | 1757 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | 1469 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 9B better than GLM-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2 9B or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and GLM-5.2 share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 51.