Model comparison
Gemma 3n E4b IT vs GLM-5.1
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.1 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 55.0 to 33.6.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.12 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
- GLM-5.1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 33K.
Side by side
| Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 36.7 | 47.6 |
| Released | 2025-05-20 | 2026-04-07 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 33K | 200K |
| Max output | 33K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.06 | $1.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.12 | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 41 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 36.4 (#193), GLM-5.1: 48.5 (#52)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1269 | 1486 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 74.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
| SciCode | — | 43.8% |
| WeirdML | — | 57.1% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 887.1 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3n E4b IT: —, GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 40.9% |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,634 |
Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.2 (#239), GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1472 |
| SimpleBench | — | 55.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 31.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 77.7% |
| CritPt | — | 4.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 69.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.86 |
Math GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 32.5 (#186), GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1251 | 1472 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 67.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 22.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 33.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 12.5% |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 33.6 (#193), GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1245 | 1477 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 89.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34% |
Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.5 (#179), GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1285 | 1448 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1310 | 1516 |
| LMArena French | 1330 | 1478 |
| LMArena German | 1312 | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1274 | 1436 |
| LMArena Korean | 1259 | 1423 |
| LMArena Russian | 1288 | 1453 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1305 | 1467 |
Instruction Following GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.3 (#205), GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1255 | 1451 |
Long Context GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.8 (#185), GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1277 | 1467 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.3 (#181), GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1306 | 1462 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1287 | 1454 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1276 | 1473 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1592 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than GLM-5.1?
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.6 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3n E4b IT or GLM-5.1?
Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.12 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.
Is Gemma 3n E4b IT or GLM-5.1 better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.5 versus 36.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-5.1 does, with 200K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3n E4b IT and GLM-5.1 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.