Model comparison

Gemma 2 2b IT vs GLM-5.3

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 2b IT Google

33.1

Rank #248 Confirmed

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3 leads 75.7 to 36.5.

Side by side

Gemma 2 2b IT and GLM-5.3 specifications
Gemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index33.154.8
Released—2026-08-14
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked1742

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#273), GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
LMArena Coding11121496
DeepSWE—69%
FrontierCode—40.1%
CursorBench—42.6%
LMArena WebDev—1622
FrontierSWE—30.2%
SciCode—59%
WeirdML—75.4%
ALE-Bench—1,317

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 2b IT: —, GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
APEX-Agents—56.6%
Vending-Bench 2—8,164

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 21.4 (#224), GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
LMArena Hard Prompts11131489
NYT Connections (extended)—74.2%
CritPt—19.1%
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—33%
DTBench—87.7%
LMCA—55.5%
Bench to the Future 3—0.15
Epoch Capabilities Index—155.61

Math GLM-5.3 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.6 (#212), GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
LMArena Math11351489
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—68.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4—29.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—91.1%
ProofBench—49%

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.9 (#231), GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
LMArena Expert10961516
GPQA Diamond—90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—41%

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#257), GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
LMArena Non-English11211457
LMArena Chinese11321528
LMArena French11571499
LMArena German11141499
LMArena Japanese10831453
LMArena Korean10551472
LMArena Russian11181463
LMArena Spanish11401460

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 57.8 (#263), GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
LMArena Instruction Following11181477

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.3 (#250), GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
LMArena Longer Query11301482

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.5 (#263), GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITGLM-5.3
LMArena Text11561471
LMArena Creative Writing11471457
LMArena Multi-Turn11181472
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—2075

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than GLM-5.3?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 2b IT or GLM-5.3 better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and GLM-5.3 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3 has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper