Model comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs GLM-4.6V
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 10× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 8 categories and GLM-4.6V in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 27.6.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 56.7 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2026-02-19 | 2025-12-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 128K |
| Max output | 66K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $12 | $0.90 |
| Results tracked | 71 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99), GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1484 | 1390 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 75.6% | — |
| DeepSWE | 11.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1447 | — |
| SciCode | 58.9% | — |
| GSO | 22.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 72.1% | — |
| MirrorCode | 8.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,161 | — |
| AlgoTune | 2.02 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), GLM-4.6V: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 35.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 26% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 47.8% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 22% | — |
| BALROG | 57% | — |
| ExploitBench | 26.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 17% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1211 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 77% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,774 | — |
Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12), GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1368 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 77.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 79.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 97.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98% | — |
| CritPt | 17.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 55% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 36.8% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 79.4% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | — |
| DTBench | 97.1% | — |
| LMCA | 53.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.77 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59 | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), GLM-4.6V: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 59.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 86.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 26% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1485 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 36.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 16.7% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1485 | 1371 |
| GPQA Diamond | 94.4% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.4% | — |
Multimodal Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | 1164 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 26.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 26.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1444 | — |
Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12), GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1477 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | 1425 |
| LMArena Russian | 1498 | 1340 |
| LMArena French | 1487 | — |
| LMArena German | 1491 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1493 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1455 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1479 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1466 | 1352 |
Long Context Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | 1358 |
| CL-bench | 20.8% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 16.9% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37), GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1481 | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1482 | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1488 | 1360 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1491 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1142 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than GLM-4.6V?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 10× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.
Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or GLM-4.6V better for coding?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and GLM-4.6V share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.