Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GLM-4.7

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7 costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 7 categories and GLM-4.7 in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 59.8 to 42.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 62.4% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 47.7% for GLM-4.7.
  • GLM-4.7 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index45.042.0
Released2025-03-252025-12-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M205K
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$10$2.20
Results tracked7836

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7 leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101), GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena WebDev12271435
SciCode42.8%45.1%
LMArena Coding14521454
ALE-Bench785.52399.48
SWE-bench Verified57.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)53.6%—
Aider Polyglot83.1%—
GSO3.9%—
WeirdML54%—
LiveBench Coding85.9%—
CadEval64%—
AlgoTune1.51—

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
Terminal-Bench32.6%33.4%
Vending-Bench 2573.642,377
GDPval23.3%—
Remote Labor Index0.8%—
TheAgentCompany30.3%—
τ²-bench Banking13.7%—
DeepResearch Bench42.8%—
BALROG43.3%—
LMArena Search1142—
METR Time Horizons55.4%—

Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99), GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
SimpleBench62.4%47.7%
CritPt2%1.7%
Chess Puzzles20%6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14551443
Epoch Capabilities Index145.32143.51
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%—
ARC-AGI-141%—
EnigmaEval5.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning89.8%—
DTBench82.4%—
LiveBench Data Analysis79.9%—
LMCA34.8%—
ForecastBench61.3—
LiveBench82.3%—

Math GLM-4.7 leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584.7%83.3%
LMArena Math14501423
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)14.1%2.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%0%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)24.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 40%—
ProofBench—6%
Omni-MATH41.6%—
LiveBench Math90.2%—
MATH Level 595.9%—

Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46), GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
GPQA Diamond85.3%83.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate7%11.7%
LMArena Expert14521424
Humanity's Last Exam21.6%—
SimpleQA Verified—32.2%
MMLU-Pro86.3%—
Confabulations10.6%—
GPQA (HELM)74.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18), GLM-4.7: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Vision1263—
GeoBench86%—
VPCT48%—
LMArena Document1421—
SpatialViz-Bench44.7%—

Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Non-English14511417
LMArena Chinese15071495
LMArena French14721432
LMArena German14871424
LMArena Japanese14611439
LMArena Korean14341399
LMArena Russian14611423
LMArena Spanish14731434

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Instruction Following14371411
LiveBench Instruction Following80.6%—
IFEval84%—

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Longer Query14491432
Fiction.LiveBench91.7%—
CL-bench—15.9%
CL-bench Life—10.9%

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Text14581435
LMArena Creative Writing14541401
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14211413
LMArena Multi-Turn14531446
Short-Story Creative Writing83.8%—
WildBench85.7%—
LiveBench Language67.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than GLM-4.7?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7 costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM-4.7 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM-4.7 share?

32 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper