Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs GLM-5.1
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 34.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 1 category and GLM-5.1 in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.1 leads 38.2 to 15.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 93.3% for GLM-5.1.
- GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 34.8 | 47.6 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2026-04-07 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 200K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 41 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.2 (#308), GLM-5.1: 48.5 (#52)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 25.8% | 57.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1351 | 1486 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 74.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
| SciCode | — | 43.8% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 887.1 |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.0 (#85), GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 40.9% |
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,634 |
Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#308), GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | 55.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1472 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | 149.86 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 77.7% |
| CritPt | — | 4.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 69.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math GLM-5.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.1 (#127), GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1351 | 1472 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | 33.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 67.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 22.2% |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 12.5% |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#207), GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | 89.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1340 | 1477 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34% |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 35.9 (#74), GLM-5.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.6 (#144), GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1448 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1516 |
| LMArena French | 1390 | 1478 |
| LMArena German | 1354 | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1293 | 1436 |
| LMArena Korean | 1314 | 1423 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1453 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1467 |
Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.6 (#91), GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1451 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context GLM-5.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#198), GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1467 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.8 (#184), GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1462 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1454 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | 1592 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1473 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than GLM-5.1?
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 34.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or GLM-5.1 better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 28.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and GLM-5.1 share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.