Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs GLM-4.7-Flash
Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.7-Flash score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 38.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 5 categories and GLM-4.7-Flash in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 40.9 to 29.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 60.5% for GLM-4.7-Flash.
- GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 38.4 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2026-01-19 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 200K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.06 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.0 (#133)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1383 |
Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.2 (#224)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1356 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), GLM-4.7-Flash: 34.4 (#159)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 58.3% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1354 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.4 (#177)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 60.5% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1357 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.8 (#152)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1331 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1403 |
| LMArena French | — | 1332 |
| LMArena German | — | 1336 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1284 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1333 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1351 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.3 (#162)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1327 |
Long Context GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#143)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1345 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.7 (#206)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1297 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1125 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1342 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than GLM-4.7-Flash?
Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.7-Flash score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 38.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or GLM-4.7-Flash better for coding?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.7-Flash share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7-Flash has 21.