# Gemma 3n E4b IT vs GLM-4.6V

> GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 6.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-3n-e4b-it-vs-glm-4-6v
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.6V in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.6V leads 26.5 to 19.2.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.12 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.
- GLM-4.6V accepts more context: 128K tokens versus 33K.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 36.7 | 40.9 |
| Rank | 203 | 133 |
| Context | 33K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.06 | $0.30 |
| Output $/M | $0.12 | $0.90 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 36.4 (#193)
- GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1269 | 1390 |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.2 (#239)
- GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1368 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 31.5% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 32.5 (#186)
- GLM-4.6V: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1251 | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 33.6 (#193)
- GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1245 | 1372 |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: —
- GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.5 (#179)
- GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1285 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1310 | 1426 |
| LMArena Russian | 1288 | 1341 |
| LMArena French | 1330 | — |
| LMArena German | 1312 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1274 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1259 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1305 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.3 (#205)
- GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1255 | 1351 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.8 (#185)
- GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1277 | 1358 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.3 (#181)
- GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1306 | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1287 | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1276 | 1359 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than GLM-4.6V?

GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 6.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 3n E4b IT or GLM-4.6V?

Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.12 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.

### Is Gemma 3n E4b IT or GLM-4.6V better for coding?

GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 36.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.6V does, with 128K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 3n E4b IT and GLM-4.6V share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.