Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs GLM-5.2

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 51.1 on the Noometry Index. GLM-5.2 costs 2.1× 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 . 48 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Google

56.7

Rank #23 Confirmed

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 48 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 7 categories and GLM-5.2 in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 42.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 77.1% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and 22.8% for GLM-5.2.
  • GLM-5.2 is cheaper at $1.40 / $4.40 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 1M.
  • GLM-5.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index56.751.1
Released2026-02-192026-06-13
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M1M
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2$1.40
Output $ / M tokens$12$4.40
Results tracked7151

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99), GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
SWE-bench Verified75.6%78.7%
DeepSWE11.7%43.8%
LMArena WebDev14471603
SciCode58.9%50.5%
WeirdML72.1%70.1%
LMArena Coding14841485
ALE-Bench1,1611,047
FrontierCode—24.5%
GSO22.6%—
MirrorCode8.9%—
AlgoTune2.02—

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
APEX-Agents35.3%45.2%
τ²-bench Banking26%37.1%
PostTrainBench22%31.7%
GBAEval0.8%0%
Vending-Bench 23,7748,314
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
DeepResearch Bench47.8%—
BALROG57%—
ExploitBench26.1%—
GDP.pdf17%—
LMArena Search1211—
METR Time Horizons77%—

Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12), GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
ARC-AGI-277.1%22.8%
SimpleBench79.6%58.8%
NYT Connections (extended)97.4%74.3%
ARC-AGI-198%77%
CritPt17.7%20.9%
Chess Puzzles55%21%
EBR-Bench14.3%9.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14851480
Mystery Game Puzzles34%19%
DTBench97.1%93.6%
LMCA53.8%45.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index154.77151.78
Kagi LLM Benchmark—62.6%
EnigmaEval36.8%—
Thematic Generalization79.4%—
Surface Evolver Bench—55.6%
ForecastBench59—

Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.6%59.2%
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%29.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions86.5%67.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%86.4%
ProofBench26%35%
LMArena Math14851482
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-5.2: 57.1 (#40)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
GPQA Diamond94.4%91.9%
SimpleQA Verified73.5%34.2%
LMArena Expert14851486
Humanity's Last Exam46.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), GLM-5.2: —

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
LMArena Vision1296—
Blueprint-Bench 226.5%—
Furniture Assembly26.7%—
LMArena Document1444—

Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12), GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
LMArena Non-English14771459
LMArena Chinese15291519
LMArena French14871479
LMArena German14911468
LMArena Japanese14931451
LMArena Korean14551445
LMArena Russian14981466
LMArena Spanish14791477

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
LMArena Instruction Following14661465

Long Context Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
LMArena Longer Query14831479
CL-bench20.8%—
CL-bench Life16.9%—

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37), GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGLM-5.2
LMArena Text14811470
LMArena Creative Writing14821462
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14911757
EQ-Bench 411421222
LMArena Multi-Turn14881469

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than GLM-5.2?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 51.1 on the Noometry Index. GLM-5.2 costs 2.1× 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-5.2?

GLM-5.2 is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or GLM-5.2 better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 42.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and GLM-5.2 share?

48 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.2 has 51.

Related comparisons

Go deeper